BANCROFT 
LIBRARY 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/2000changesinboo00callrich 


KJ 


:  r-'-i  <"1 


BOOK  of  MORMON 


.    COTAfNIMG 
The  way   ih'"^   bo'^'-k   i;-   cIpd'jm"!  lo  i.-iv  »  .  •  -s 
traiislated,    the  <ua'-*jtOiaent>    wlwr':^    b-\\.     '-  ,-i' 
made  in  the  book     .vn.it   ^.o   ^'-.spirfy!   d  -     J  d-o' 
sliould  have  been,  and  tint  rea?oa.s  giVen   i^y    *-^''" 
church  for  making  :he  many  oranur.Ptf-K.iA  •,*''^'  ^  ' 
cK^ns;  showisia  thai    th'-    vJai^n      di'       "'ons.-.  '»    . 


Bv  I  .AMONJ  CALL. 

190  Gordon  Laiio.  i.  r   d.  4,  >'i]'.v;i    I  'i  il 
Price  /•'>  crrl^.  po^-.^  ly  n'  ; 


CHAfES  IN  THE 

BOOK  OF  MORMON. 


CONTAINING 

The  way  the  b3ok  is  claimed  to  have  been  translated, 

The  amendments  which  have  been  made  in  the 

book.        What     an     inspired     translation 

should    have    been,    and    the    reasons 

given  by  the  church  for  making  the 

many    grammatical  changes.  . 

SHOWING 

That  the  claims  are  inconsistent  and  untrue. 


BY  LAMONI  CALL, 
coMPiLBR  OP  "The  Gospel  In  A  Nut  Shell.' 


BOUNTIFUL,  UTAH, 

AUG.  1898. 


•C  19 


COPYRIGHT  BY 

-LAMONI  CALL,- 
1898. 


Bancroft  Library 


PREFACE. 

In  lifting  my  pen  against  the  book 
my  friends  hold  as  sacred,  I  realize,  in 
part,  at  least,  my  position.  My  friends 
and  relatives  are  mostly  in  the  chnrch, 
and  many  of  them  look  with  pity  npon 
my  position;  while  I  regard  my  differ- 
ence of  opinion  as  purely  a  mental  con- 
viction, and  cannot  see  how  any  person 
can  injure  himself  in  the  sight  of  God 
if  he  does  onlj^  what  he  thinks  is  right. 
To  advise  one  not  to  think  in  any 
particular  way  would  be  as  inconsistent 
as  to  ask  the  powers  of  gravitation  not 
to  attract.  A  person  ma}^,  however, 
for  aught  I  know,  do  something  which 
will  cause  God  to  withdraw  his  spirit 
from    him     so   that    he   will  not  then 


believe  as  lie  once  did.  But  I  see  no 
difference  as  to  the  cause  of  one's  belief, 
the  onl}/  thing  for  we  poor  mortals  is 
to  do  as  we  think  we  should  do.  We 
cannot  even  follow  the  convictions  of 
yesterday,  nor  can  we  follow  those  we 
may  have  to-morrow.  The  thing  to  do 
is  to  do  what  we  believe  we  should  do 
now.  Emerson  has  in  his  essay  on 
^^Self-reliance''  (I  should  like  to  incor- 
porate the  entire  essay  as  part  of  this 
preface.)  ^'If  you  would  be  a  man,  speak 
what  you  think  to-day  in  words  as  hard 
as  cannon  balls,  and  to-morrow  speak 
what  to-morrow  thinks  in  hard  w^ords 
again;  though  it  contradict  everything 
you  said  to-day."  A  person  might  be 
held  accountable  for  doing  the  thing 
that  caused  his  mind  to  change;  if  it 
be  a  crime,  he  would  be  held  accounta- 
ble whether  his  mind  changed  or  not; 
if  honest  investigation,  that  is  a  praise- 
worthy-act at  any  time,  and  our   inves- 


tigations  should  be  made  without  fear 
of  being  convinced  in  an}^  particular 
way. 

Since,  then,  I  do  not  believe  the 
Book  of  Mormon  is  a  gift  of  heaven  to 
man,  there  are  but  three  reasons  why 
I  should  not  raise  my  voice  and  pen  to 
proclaim  against  it.  One  of  these  is 
the  lack  of  ability.  Another  is  the 
lack  of  energ}\  The  other  is  the  lack 
of  courage.  The  last  two  have  not 
stood  in  the  way,  but  I  am  not  so  sure 
but  many  will  say  the  first  should. 

What  makes  me  the  more  anxious  to 
write  my  views  is  because  I  have  been 
unable  to -satisfy  myself  that  my  stand 
is  wrong,  and  no  person  with  whom  I 
have  been  able  to  converse  upon  the 
subject  has  been  able  to  show  me  the 
fallacy  in  my  argument.  It  maj^  exist 
for  all  that,  and  there  may  be  plenty  of 
people  able  to  help  me.  The  publica- 
tion of  this  little  work  will  put  them  in 


possession  of  one  of  iny  difficulties, 
which  if  they  can  remove,  will  give  me 
great  hope  that  the  others  may  be  re- 
moved. If  truth  is  against  me  I  most 
sincerely  hope  some  person  with  the 
spirit  of  sympathy  burning  deep  in  his 
bosom  will  step  forward  and  save 
another  soul  unto  Christ.  Be  assured, 
if  you  come  with  reason  you  will  be 
considered,  but  do  not  ask  me  to  lay 
aside  my  mind  and  take  that  of  any 
other  person. 

I  have  endeavored  to  write  without 
animosity,  and  to  use  nothing  of  a  repul 
sive  nature.  No  vile  names  are  used. 
But  in  all  cases  reference  is  made  to 
matters  of  history  in  the  most  respectful 
language  at  my  command.  I  believe 
those  who  hold  the  Book  of  Mormon 
as  sacred  can  read  without  having  their 
ire  aroused  by  false  statements,  oi* 
abusive  accusations. 

The  Author. 


]J2©N[|  ^h^  SMto©  ^m^  1^2i3i©Ma®il* 


T  MAY  not  seem  a  matter  of  im- 
portance to  some  to  learn  just  how 
the  plates  were  translated.  But  it 
seems  to  me  that  a  great  matter  rests 
upon  even  this  small  point  of  history. 
If  it  is  a  fact  that  Joseph  had  the 
plates  as  he  said,  and  translated  them 
as  we  are  told  he  did,  the  probabilities 
are  that  tliose  who  were  intimately  cor 
nected  with  the  work  would  get  a  cor- 
rect understanding  of  the  way  it  was 
done,  and  we  would  be  furnished  with 
correct  data  regarding  so  great  a  sub- 
ject. 

I  have  considered,  carefully,  all  the 
references  made  to  the  way  the  work 
of  translation  was  performed  that  I  have 
been   able  to  find,  but   at   present  can- 


1 8  HOW    THE    BOOK 

not    tell     liOw    the    work    was    accom- 
plislied. 

It  is  necessary  that  we  learn  as  much 
about  the  historical  evidence  as  we  can 
before  we  enler  into  the  subject  mat- 
ter of  this  little  work.  Indeed  we 
should  have  the  wIk  le  truth  to  do  it 
justice.  But  since  I  have  not  found 
what  satisfies  me  as  being  the  whole 
truth,  w^e  will  go  to  work  as  best  w^e 
can. 

Elder  George  RcN^nolds,  in  writing 
on  the  subject  of  ^^Time  Occupied  in 
Translatingthe  Book  of  Mormon/'  sa}' s: 

1.  "Objection  has  been  made  to  the  divinity  of 
the  Book  of  Mormon  on  the  ground  that  the  aeconnt 
given  in  the  publications  of  the  Church,  of  the  time 
occupied  in  the  work  of  translation  is  far  too  short 
for  the  accomplishment  of  such  a  labor,  and  conse- 
quently it  must  have  been  copied  or  transcribed  from 
some  work  written  in  the  English  language,  most 
probably  from  Spaulding's  *Manuscript  Found.' 
Bat  at  1  he  outset  it  must  be  recollected  that  the  trans- 
lation was  accomplished  by  no  common  method,  by 


WAS    TRANSLATED.  1 9 

no  ordiudry  meau^.  lo  was  doae  by  divine  aid.  There 
were  no  delays  ovtr  rb  cure  passages,  no  difficnlties 
over  the  choice  of  words,  110  atoppagps  from  the  ig- 
noracce  of  the  translator;  no  time  was  wasted  in 
investigation  or  argument  over  the  value,  intent  or 
meaning  of  certain  characters,  and  there  were  no 
reft^rences  to  authorities.  These  difficulties  to  hu- 
man work  were  removed.  All  was  a^  simple  as  when 
a  clerk  writes  from  dictation.  The  translation  cf 
the  characters  appeared  on  theUrim  and  Thummifr\ 
sentence  by  sentence,  and  as  soon  as  one  was  correctly 
transcribed  the  next  would  appear.  So  the  enqiry 
narrows  down  to  the  consideration  cf  this  simple 
question,  how  much  could  Oliver  Gowdrey  write  in  a 
day?'*- Myth  cf  the  Manufcript  Found,  Pace  71. 

Again,  from  the  same  author,  we 
have  a  quotation  from  Martin  Hanis, 
one  of  the  three  witnesses,  Joseph's 
first  scribe,  a  man  who  befriended  Jo- 
seph, and  was  in  his  company  at  first, 
when  the  work  was  yet  in  embryo;  the 
man  who  saw  as  much  of  the  process  as 
God  designed  man — other  than  his 
prophet  Joseph — to  see  at  that  lime: 

2.    **He  said  that  the  Prophet  posi^essed  a  seer 


20  HOW    THE   BOOK 

stone,  by  which  he  whs  enabled  to  translate  as  well 
as  from  the  Urim  and  ThDmmim,andfor  conveDieLce 
he  then  used  the  seer  stone.  Martin  explained  the 
translation  as  follows:  By  aid  of  the  seer  stone, 
sentences  would  appear  and  were  read  by  the  prophft 
and  written  by  Martin,  and  when  finished  he  would 
say,  *Written,'  and  if  correctly  written,  that  sentence 
would  disappear  and  another  appear  in  its  place,  but 
if  not  written  correctly  it  remained  until  corrected, 
so  that  the  translation  was  jast  as  it  was  engraven 
on  the  plates,  precisely  in  the  languapre  then  used/' 
—Myth  of  the  Manuscript  Found,  Page  91.     , 

M.  T.  Lamb  lias  quoted  Tavid  Wliit- 
mer's  description  of  the  process  from 
the  Deseret  Evening  News  of  Decem- 
ber 24,  1885: 

3.  •'After  affixing  the  magical  spectacles  to  his 
eyes.  Smith  would  take  the  plates  and  translate  the 
characters  one  at  a  time.  The  graven  characters 
would  appear  in  succession  to  the  seer,  and  directly 
under  the  character,  when  viewed  through  the 
glasses,  would  be  the  translation  in  English."— 
The  Golden  Bible,  page  241 . 

B.  H.  Roberts,  in  his  ''Brief  History 
of  the  Chnrch,"  has  the  following  foot- 


WAS     TKANSLATFD.  21 

note,  but  he  does  not  tell  where  he  gets 
it.  O.  F.  Whitney  has  almost  the  same 
thing  in  his  "History  of  Utah:'^ 

4.  "The  following  is  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
Sdid  the  Book  of  Mormon  was  trant-lated:  *ThB 
Prophet,  scanning  through  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
the  golden  pages,  would  see  appear,  in  lieu  of  the 
strange  characters  engraved  thereon,  their  equiv- 
alent in  English  words.  These  he  would  repeat,  and 
the  scribe,  separated  from  him  by  a  veil  or  curtain, 
would  write  them  down,  *  *  *  Until  the  writing 
was  correct  in  every  particular,  the  word^  last  given 
would  remain  before  the  eyes  of  the  translator,  and 
not  disappear.  But  on  the  necessary  correction  be- 
ing made,  they  would  immpdiately  pass  awav  and  be 
succeeded  by  others.*  "-  Brief  History  of  the  Church, 
page  28, 

Dr.  Wyle,  an  anti-Mormon  author, 
qnotes  Emma's — the  Prophet's  first 
wife — death-bed  statement  to  her  son 
Joseph: 

5.  "In  writing  for  your  father  I  freqently  wrote 
day  after  day,  often  sitting  at  the  table  close  by  him, 
he  sitting  with  his  face  buried  in  his  hat  with  the 
stone  in  it."— Mormon  Portraits,  page  203. 


2  2  HOW   THE   BOOK 

Daniel  P.  Kidder  published  a  work 
in  1842.  Tliisj  too,  is  anti-MoriiiOii, 
and  we  can  take  it  for  what  it  is  worth. 
We  make  an  extract  from  a  statement 
made  b\^  Joseph's  father-in-law,  Isaac 
Hale: 

6.  *'The  manner  in  which  he  pretended  to 
read  and  in-erpret,  was  the  came  as  when  he 
looked  for  the  money-diggers,  with  the  stone  in  his 
hat,  and  his  hat  over  his  face,  while  the  book  of 
plates  was  at  the  same  time  hid  in  the  wood?." — 
Mormonism  and  the  Mormons,  page  32. 

A  Chicago  Times  correspondent  vis- 
ited David  Whitmer,  and  published  an 
article  which  was  criticised  by  the  Des- 
eret  Evening  News  at  the  time.  Our 
extract  was  not  criticised,  so  it  must 
have  been  correct,  according  to  the 
ideas  of  the  editor: 

7.  "Frequently  one  character  would  make  two 
lines  of  manuscript,  while  others  made  but  a  word 
or  two  words."— Myth  of  M.  F.,  page  83. 

In  order  to  avoid   trouble  in    calling 


WAS    TRANSLVrED.  23 

attention  to  the  above  extracts  we  have 
numbered  them. 

The  only  point  of  interest  to  me  in 
Nos.  5  and  6  is  that  the  stone  was 
placed  in  Joseph's  hat.  Just  where  the 
plates  were  I  cannot  tell,  for  if  Joseph 
had  the  stone  and  his  face  buried  in  his 
hat,  it  is  hardly  probable  that  the  plates 
could  have  been  there  too.  If  tliey 
were,  the  light  must  have  peen  exclud- 
ed, so  he  could  not  view  them  with  his 
natural  eyes,  and  the  work  could  not 
be  read  as  we  would  read  a  work  by  the 
light  of  the  sun. 

Extract  No.  one  says:  ^'The  trans- 
lation of  the  characters  appeared 
ON  the  Urim  and  Thummim."  No. 
three  says  Joseph  viewed  the  characters 
^'through''  the  glasses.  No.  four  also 
says  that  he  viewed  the  plates  through 
the  Urim  and  Thummim.  The  ques- 
tion which  now  presents  itself  is,  did 
the  translation  appear  on  the  stone,  or 


24  HOW   THE    BOOK 

Urim  and  Thuaiiiiiiii,  or  did  Joseph 
look  THROUGH  the  instrument  and  see 
the  translation  beyond  it,  or  was  it 
sometimes  one  way  and  sometimes  the 
other  way.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  after 
reading  what  all  three  extracts  say,  I 
do  not  know  anything  about  it. 

Number  three  sa3^s:  ^^The  graven 
characters  would  appear  in  succession 
to  the  seer,  and  directly  under  the  char- 
acter, when  viewed  through  the  glasses, 
would  be  the  translation  in  English. 
In  number  four  Joseph  ^^would  see  ap- 
pear, IN  LIEU  of  the  strange  characters 
engraven  thereon,  their  equivalent  in 
English  words."  Number  one  says 
^^The  translation  of  the  characters  ap- 
peared on  the  Urim  and  Thummim.'' 
It  is  important  that  we  understand 
this  matter,  so  please  note  carefully. 
Number  three  says  both  character  and 
English  appeared,  number  four  says 
only    the    English    appeared;     u umber 


WAS     TRANSLATED.  25 

one  says  the  translation  appeared,  bat 
says  nothing  abont  the  characters  ap- 
pearing. So  after  getting  all  I  can 
out  of  this,  I  am  not  certain  of  the  way 
the  translation  was  performed. 

Number  seven  may  throw  a  little 
light  on  the  subject:  ^ ^Frequently  one 
character  would  make  two  lines  of  man- 
uscript, while  others  would  make  but  a 
word  or  tw^o  words."  If  the  English 
appeared  in  liEU  of  the  characters,  how 
could  Joseph  tell  which  character  made 
the  English  before  him?  And  if  the 
translation  only  came  up  upon  the 
Urim  and  Thummim,  how  could  he  tell 
what  part  of  the  record  he  was  working 
on?  How  could  he  tell  when  to  turn 
over  the  leaf?  Or  is  it  a  fact  that  they 
sometimes  translated  with  the  plates  in 
the  woods?  Or  were  they  placed  in  a 
hat  and  all  the  light  of  day  excluded? 
If  Joseph  looked  through  the  instru- 
ment, and  saw  the  graven  characters 


26  HOW    THE    BOOK 

appear  in  succession,  and  the  English 
too,  it  is  possible  that  he  might  have 
known  the  amount  of  English  each 
character  made.  But  if  he  was  look- 
ing at  the  whole  page,  what  became  of 
the  characters  that  did  not  stand  in 
view  of  the  translator?  Did  the  in- 
strument cover  the  page  with  a  mist, 
and  only  allow  the  propper  character 
to  appear  throngh  the  mist,  or  does  it 
look  as  though  the  story  was  fabricated 
out  of  whole  cloth,  and  that  it  was  not 
so  carefully  thought  out  that  sometimes 
one  story  was  told  and  sometimes  an- 
other. In  the  second  Martin  says:  ^'So 
that  the  translation  was  just  ^s  it  was 
engraven  on  the  plates,  precisely  in  the 
language  then  used.''  This  to  me  is  a 
statement  made  at  random,  for  as  I  un- 
derstand translation,  the  thought  is  all 
that  could  possibly  have  been  repro- 
duced; and  as  Martin  kne\/  nothing  of 
language,  it    was   impossible   to    know^ 


WAS     TRANSLATKD.  27 

more  than  that  Joseph  or  some  other 
power  told  him  that  such  was  the  case. 
We  expect  to  present,  further  on  in  this 
little  work,  a  chapter  on  tj'anslation. 

The  spelling  and  punctuation  is  a 
matter  of  interest  to  me.  The  question 
is,  did  the  heavenly  instrument  spell 
and  punctuate  the  work  for  Joseph? 
From  the  extracts  quoted  one  would  be 
led  to  think  the  work  was  ^^correct  in 
every  particular/^  and  as  spelling  and 
punctuation  are  both  particulars,  they 
must  have  been  included.  To  be  sure, 
the  misspelling  of  many  words  could 
not  lead  one  astray;  but  if  the  work 
came  up,  either  on  the  instrument  or  on 
tlie  plates,  or  in  some  divinely  formed 
background,  it  must  have  come  in  script 
or  print  to  have  been  understood  by 
Joseph.  If  it  came  in  either  way,  of 
course  each  word  would  have  been 
spelled  correctl3\  Probably  the  singu- 
lar and  plural  of  verbs  would  have  given 


28  HOW   THE   BOOK 

Joseph  the  most  trouble  if  they  were 
not  spelled  for  him. 

With  his  education  at  the  time  he 
would  not  have  been  likely  to  get  all 
these  things  right,  and  if  they  had  been 
written  incorrectly,  the  printer  would 
have  been  likely  to  want  to  change 
them,  and  if  they  were  to  have  insisted 
that  God  was  responsible  for  every 
word,  as  he  most  assuredly  would  have 
been  if  the  instrument  furnished  every 
word,  of  course  he  would  have  let  it 
remain  as  God  gave  it.  Neither  love, 
money  nor  threats  would  have  induced 
him  to  have  made  a  change,  even  if  he 
had  used  the  singular  for  the  plural 
verb,  or  vice  versa. 

The  punctuation,  however,  is  a  mat- 
ter of  very  great  importance.  Occa- 
sionally we  meet  with  sentences  which 
can  be  punctuated  so  they  will  not  con- 
vey the  idea  the  author  wished  to  con- 
vey.    We  often  get  letters  written  with- 


WAS    TRANSLATED.  29 

out  punctuation,  and  many  times  they 
are  difficult  to  understand.  But  as  a 
matter  of  history  the  Book  of  Mormon 
manuscript  was  not  punctuated.  The 
typo  who  set  the  first  edition  says: 
''We  had  a  great  deal  of  trouble  with 
it.  It  was  not  punctuated  at  all.  They 
did  not  know  anything  about  punctua- 
tion, and  we  had  to  do  that  ourselves." 
It  seems  to  me  that  God  could  have 
added  the  punctuation  just  as  well  as 
not,  especially  when  he  was  doing,  as 
Orson  Pratt  says,  ^  What  could  be  more 
marvelous  and  wonderful,  than  for  the 
Lord  to  cause  an  unlearned  youth  to 
read  or  translate  a  book  which  the  wis- 
dom of  the  most  wise  and  learned  could 
not  read?'' — Orson  Pratt's  Works,  page 
298. 

.  Had  this  language  been  perfect,  it 
would  have  been  marvelous,  and  there 
is  plenty  of  room  for  a  perfect  being  to 
have  improved  even  on  the  best,  but  if 


30  HOW   THE    BOOK 

the  most  marvelous  part  is  its  clumsi- 
ness, and  if  the  translator  was  not  fur- 
nished with  the  punctuation,  and  had 
to  leave  so   important    a    matter  to    a 
common   scrub   printer,  (as  Joseph   F. 
Smith  informs  the  writer  that  Grandon 
was,  and  that  they  could  not  get  a  first- 
class  printer  to  do  the  work)  to  say  the 
least,  the  work   was   not  so  marvelous 
as  it  could  have  been.     God's  way  may 
not  be  as  man's  ways,  but  so  far  as  the 
writer  is  concerned,  he  would  have  had 
more  faith  in  the  work   if  it  had  been 
^'correct  in  every  particular,"  a  model 
of  simplicity  in  English,  and  not  need 
more  than  3,000  amendments  to  make 
it  passable  among  even  scrub  English 
scholars.     My    faith  would  have  been 
greater  if  the  words  ''Carefully  revised 
by  the  translator''  had  not  appeared  in 
the  title  page  of  each  edition  except  the 
first  as  far  as  the  fourth.     We   close 


WAS    TRANSLATED.  3 I 

this  subject  willi  an  extract  set  without 
paragraplis  or  punctuation: 

And  now  Abinadi  said  onto  them  I  would  that 
ye  should  understand  that  God  himself  shall  come 
down  among  the  children  of  men  and  shall  redeem 
his  people  and  because  he  dwelleth  in  Ifleeh  he  shall 
be  called  the  Son  of  God  and  having  subjected  the 
flesh  to  the  will  of  the  Father  being  the  Father  and 
the  Son  the  Father  because  he  was  conceived  by  the 
power  of  God  and  the  Son  because  of  the  flesh  thus 
becoming  the  Father  and  the  SDn  and  they  are  one 
God  yea  the  yery  eternal  Father  of  heaven  and  of 
earth  and  thus  the  flesh  becoming  subject  to  the 
spirit  or  the  Son  to  the  Facher  being  one  God  suffer- 
eth  temptation  and  yieldeth  not  to  the  temptation 
but  suffereth  himself  to  be  moeked  and  scourged  and 
cast  out  and  disowned  by  his  people  and  after  all 
this  after  working  many  mighty  miracles  among  the 
children  of  men  he  shall  be  led  yea  even  as  Isaiah 
said  as  a  sheep  before  the  shearer  is  dumb  so  he 
opened  not  his  mouth  yea  even  so  shall  he  be  led 
crucified  and  slain  the  fle^sh  becoming  subject  eyen 
unto  death  the  will  of  the  Son  being  swallowed  up 
in  the  will  of  the  Father  and  thus  God  breaketh  the 
bands  of  death  having  gained  the  victory  over  death 
giving  the  Son  power  to  make  intercession  for  the 


32  HOW   THE    BOOK 

children  of  men  having  ascended  into  heaven  having 
the  bowels  of  mercy  being  filled  with  compassion 
towards  the  children  of  men  standing  betwixt  them 
and  justice  having  broken  the  bands  of  death  taken 
npon  himself  their  iniquity  and  their  transgressions 
having  redeemed  them  and  satisfied  the  demands  of 
justice  and  now  I  say  unto  you  who  shall  declare  his 
generation  behold  I  say  unto  you  that  when  his  soul 
has  been  made  an  offering  for  sin  he  shall  see  his 
seed  and  now  what  say  ye  and  who  shall  be  his  seed 

We  must  go  over  these  extracts  for 
another  point,  the  most  important  of  all 
to  me.  Number  four  says:  ^^Until  the 
writing  was  CORRECT  in  every  partic- 
ular the  words  last  given  would  re- 
main before  the  eyes  of  the  translator, 
and  not  disappear.  But  on  the  neces- 
sary corrections  being  made,  they  would 
immediately  pass  away  and  be  succeed- 
ed by  others."  Number  two  says: 
'^And  if  CORRECTLY  written,  that  sen- 
tence would  disappear  and  another  ap- 
pear in  its  place.  But  if  not  written 
CORRECTLY  it  remained  until  correct- 


WAS    TRANSLATED.  33 

ED.''  Number  one  says:  '^There 
were  no  delay  s  over  obscure  passages, 
no  difl&ciilties  over  the  choice  of  words, 
no  stoppages  from  the  ignorance  of  the 
translator;  no  time  was  wasted  in  in- 
vestigation or  ^argument  over  the  value 
intent  or  meaning  of  certain  characters, 
and  there  were  no  references  to  au- 
thorities. These  difficulties  to  human 
work  were  removed.  All  was  as  simple 
as  when  a  clerk  writes  from  dictation. 
The  translation  of  the  characters  ap- 
peared on  the  Urim  and  Thummim, 
sentence  by  sentence,  and  as  soon  as 
one  was  correctly  transcribed  the 
next  would  appear.'' 

This  is  one  point  of  history  where 
there  is  no  disagreement  in  testimony 
so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  learn. 
Joseph  was  furnished  with  every  syl- 
lable. He  did  not  have  to  ransack  his 
scanty  vocabulary  for  the  proper  word. 
'^It  was  all  as   simple  as  when  a  clerk 


34  HOW    THE    BOOK 

writes  from  dictation,"  when  tlie  dictator 
reads  from  a  printed  page.  If  he  could 
not  pronounce  it  he  C(mld  spell  it,  and  it 
did  not  matter  whether  he  knew  the 
meaning  or  not. 

If  language  could  be  n'lade  stronger 
than  the  above  in  proof  that  Joseph  had 
every  word  furnished  him  by  the  in- 
strument, it  is  given  in  the  following: 

REVELATION. 

(Sec.  10  Present  Edition.  Sec.  9  First  Edition,  D.  &  C.) 

Revelation  given  to  Joseph  Smith,  jun.,  in  Harmony,  Penn- 
sylvania, May,  1829,  informing  him  of  the  alteration  of 
the  Manuscript  of  the  fore  part  of  the  Book  of  Mormon. 

1.  Now,  behold,  I  say  unto  you,  that  because 
you  delivered  up  those  [so  manyjwritiugs  which  you 
had  power  given  unto  you  totraDSlate,by  the  means  of 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  into  the  hands  of  a  wicked 
man,  you  have  lost  them ; 

2.  And  you  also  lost  your  gift  at  the  same  time, 
and  your  mind  became  darkened. 

3.  Nevertheless,  it  is  now  [has  been]  restored  unto 

[NOT§— The  parts  set  in  light  face  type  and  enclosed  in 
brackets  have  been  eliminated  since  the  first  edition,  in  1833. 
The  parts  set  in  light  face  type  and  not  enclosed  in  brackets 
have  been  added  since  the  first  edition.] 


WAS    TRANSLATED.  35 

5  ou  a^aiD,  therefore  see  that  you  ar*^  fathful  aDd  con- 
tinue [go]  on  unto  the  finishing  of  the  remainder  of 
the  work  of  translation  as  you  have  bfgun. 

4.  Do  not  run  faster,  or  labor  more  than  }ou 
have  strenth  and  means  provided  to  enable  you  to 
translate;  but  be  diligent  unto  the  end: 

5.  Pray  always,  that  you  may  come  off  con- 
quereror;  yea,  that  you  m^y  conquer  Satan,  and 
that  you  may  escape  the  hands  of  the  servants  of  Satan 
[and  those]  that  do  uphold  his  work. 

6.  Behold,  they  have  sought  to  destroy  you;  yea* 
even  the  man  in  whom  you  have  trusted,  has  sought 
to  destroy  you. 

7.  And  for  this  cause  I  said  that  he  is  a  wickf  d 
man,  for  he  has  sought  to  take  away  the  things 
wherewith  you  have  been  entrusted;  and  he  has  also 
sought  to  destroy  your  gift; 

8.  And  because  you  have  delivered  the  writings 
into  his  hands,  behold,  wicked  men  [they]  have  taken 
them  from  you: 

9.  Therefore,  you  have  delivered  them  up;  yea, 
that  which  was  sacred  unto  wickedness. 

10.  And,  behold,  Satan  has  put  it  into  tbeir 
hearts  to  alter  the  words  which  you  have  caused  to 
be  writen,  or  which  ycu  have  translated,  which  have 
gone  out  of  your  hands. 

11.  And,  behold,  I  say  unto  you,  that  because 


36  HOW    THE   BOOK 

they  have  altered  the  words,  they  read  contrary  froai 
that  which  you  translated  and  caused  to  be 
written; 

12.  And  on  this  wise,  the  devil  has  sought  to  lay 
a  cunning  plan,  that  he  may  destroy  this  work; 

13 .  For  he  has  put  it  into  their  hearts  to  do  this » 
that  by  lying  they  may  say  they  have  caught  you  in 
the  words  which  you  have  pretended  to  translate. 

14.  Verily,  I  say  unto  you,  that  I  will  not  suffer 
that  Satan  shall  accomplish  his  evil  design  in  this 
thing, 

15.  For,  behold,  he  has  put  it  into  their  hearts 
to  get  thee  tO  tempt  the  Lord  thy  [their]  God,  in  asking  to 
translate  it  over  again; 

16.  And  then,  behold,  they  say  and  think  [for  be 
hold  they  say]  in  their  hearts,  we  will  see  if  God  has 
given  him  power  to  translate,  if  so,  he  will  also  give 
him  power  again ; 

17.  And  if  God  giveth  him  power  again,  or  if  he 
translates  [translate]  again,  or  in  other  words,  if  he 
bringeth  forth  the  same  words,  behold,  we  have  the 
same  with  us,  and  we  have  altered  them: 

18-  Therefore,  they  will  not  agree,  and  we  will 
say  that  he  has  lied  in  his  words,  and  that  he  has  no 
gift,  and  that  he  has  no  power: 

19.  Therefore  we  will  destroy  him  and  also  the 
work,  and  we  will  do  this  that  we  may  not  be 


WAS     TRANSLATED.  37 

ashamed  in  the  end,  and  that  we   may  get  glory  of 
the  world. 

20.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  that  Satan  has 
great  hold  upon  thetr  hearts;  he  stirreth  them  up  to 
[do]  iniquity  against  that  which  is  good, 

21.  And  their  hearts  are  corrupt  and  full  of  wick- 
edness and  abominations,  and  they  love  darkness  rather 
than  light,  because  their  deeds  are  evil:  therefore  they 
will  not  ask  of  me. 

22.  Satan  stirreth  them  up,  that  he  may  lead  their 
souls  '0  destruction. 

23.  And  thus  he  has  laid  a  cunning  plan,  think- 
ing to  destroy  the  work  of  God,  but  I  will  require 
this  at  their  hands,  and  it  shall  turn  to  their  shame  and 
condemnation  in  the  day  of  judgment. 

24.  Yea,  he  stirreth  up  their  hearts  to  anger 
against  this  work; 

25.  Yea,  he  saith  unto  them,  deceive  and  lie  in 
wait  to  catch,  that  ye  may  destroy:  behold,  this  is 
no  harm,  and  thus  he  flattereth  them,  and  telleth 
them  that  it  is  no  sin  to  lie,  that  they  may  catch  a 
man  in  a  lie,  that  they  may  destroy  him. 

26.  And  thus  he  flattereth  them,  and  leadeth 
them  along  until  he  draggeth  their  souls  down  to  hell ; 
and  thus  he  causeth  them  to  catch  themselves  in  their 
own  snare. 


38  HO\V   THE    BOOK 

27.  And  thus  he  goeth  up  and  down,  to  and  fro 
in  the  earth,  seeking  to  destroy  the  souls  of  men. 

28.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  onto  yon,  wo  be  unto 
him  that  lieth  to  deceive,  because  he  supposeth  that 
another  lieth  to  deceive,  for  such  are  not  exempt 
from  the  justice  of  God. 

29.  Now,  behold,  they  have  altered  these  [those] 
words,  because  Satan  saith  unto  them,  He  hath  de- 
ceived you:  and  thus  he  flattereth  them  away  to  do 
iniquity,  to  get  thee  to  tempt  the  Lord  thy  [their]  God. 

30.  Behold,  I  say  unto  you,  that  you  shall  not 
translate  again  those  words  which  have  gone  foith 
out  of  your  hands: 

31.  For  behold,  they  shall  not  accomplish  their 
evil  designs  in  lying  [lie  any  more]  against  those  words. 
For  behold,  if  you  should  bring  forth  the  same  words, 
they  will  [would]  say  that  you  have  lied;  that  jou 
have  pretended  to  translate,  but  that  you  have  contra- 
dicted yourself;  [your  words] 

32.  And,  behold,  they  will  [would]  publish  this, 
and  Satan  will  [would]  harden  the  hearts  of  the  peo- 
ple to  stir  them  up  to  anger  against  you,  that  they 
will  [might]  not  believe  my  words. 

33.  Thus  Satan  thinketh  to  [would]  overpower 
your  testimony  in  this  generation,  that  the  work  may 
[might]  not  come  forth  in  this  generation: 


WAS    TRANSLATED.  39 

34.  But  behoJd,  here  is  wisdom,  and  because  I 
show  unto  you  wisdom,  and  give  tou  commandments 
concerning  these  things,  what  you  shall  do,  show  it 
not  unto  the  world  until  you  have  accomplished  the 
work  of  translation. 

Please  note  the  language  of  the  tenth 
verse^  ''Satan  has  put  it  iuto  their 
hearts  to  alter  the  words  whicli  yon 
liave  caused  to  be  written.''  Also  the 
eleventh^  ^^becanse  the}/  have  altered 
the  words  that  they  read  contrary  fioni 
that  which  you  have  translated."  No- 
tice the  thirteenth.  The  people  who 
had  the  manuscript  were  going  to  lie  by 
claiming  that  Joseph  had  not  translated 
the  work  over  again  exactly  as  it  was 
at  first.  Of  conrse  Joseph  conld  trans- 
late it  again  word  for  word;  but  what 
was  the  use?  The  people  wonld  change 
the  work,  causing  it  to  read  ^^contrary." 
In  my  way  of  looking  at  it,  language 
conld  not  be  put  up  setting  forth  the 
claim  that  Joseph  was  furnished  every 


40  HOW   THE   BOOK 

word,  and  if  he  was,  we  simpl}^  refer 
you  to  the  next  chapter,  showing  the 
changes  he  made  himself  after  the  book 
had  been  published  to  the  world.  Sure- 
ly there  can  be  no  harm  in  wondering 
if  this  is  a  cunning  plan  laid  by  Satan, 
as  set  forth  in  verses  twelve  and  thir- 
teen. 


'^^w^^ 


^^^^ 

In  ] -resenting  this  subject  we  wish 
to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
work  of  comparing  the  books  was  a 
long-,  tedions  job  for  a  working  man. 
Many  hours  were  spent  at  the  work 
when  tlie  eyes  refused  to  stand  guard 
ns  they  should,  desiring  more  to  be 
locked  in  slumber.  Therefore  it  is 
quite  probable  that  all  the  mistakes 
are  not  noted;  bnt  we  feel  quite  sure 
there  are  none  here  mentioned  wliicli 
do  not  occur. 

Where  fignres  do  not  follow  the  c(^r- 
rection  it  occurs  but  once;  where  they 
do  follow  they  tell  the  number  of  times 
tbey  do  occur.  We  did  not  use  quota- 
tion marks  to  enclose  the  parts  ii:certed 


42 


CHANGES    OF    THE 


or  taken   out,  because   there   were   not 
enough  in  the  office: 


I  BOOK  OF  NEPHl. 

Which  to  Who  76 

Which  to  whom  6 

Wnicii  to  that 

Saitli  to  fi?Ad  25 

Saith  to  say 

Theai  to  those  3 

Thev  to  them 

Tiiey  to  those  13 

Was  to  were  9 

Is  to  are  3 

Hath  to  has  3 

Had  to  has  5 

Hath  to  have  3 

Hath  to  had 

That  eliminated  61 

Was  to  are 

That  which  eliminated 

That  he  eliminated 

Saith  the  prophet  eliminated 

And  eliminated 

Do  eliminated 

My  to  thy 

Knowing  to  know 

Thou  to  ye  2 

Might  to  may 

Our  to  my 

Them  to  those 

How  to  what 

Had  eliminated  2 

Desirous  to  desirable 

In  my  dream  eliminated 

To  eliminated 

And   after  I    had    followed 

him  eliminated 
In  eliminated 
Yea  to  and 
Only  eliminated 
How  eliminated 
And  I  b^'j^lil  eliminated 
It  be  e-iminated 
Yea  eliminated  2 

Remember  to  remberest 
Should  to  are 
Dominion  to  dominions 


They  should  to  to 

All  eliminated 

Spea'<  that  to  saith 

Lieth  to  lies 

And  it  came  to  pass  elimi- 
nated 

Telleth  to  tells 

For  all  men  added 

As  if  to  that 

Wherefore  eliminated  2 

To  eliminated 

Sat  to  set 

The  son  of  added  3 

Much  eliminated 

Exceeding  to  exceedingly 

Judgment  to  judgments 

They  added 

Of  to  with 

For  to  and 

Rememberetb  to  remember- 
est 

Wherefore  eliminated 

Jesus  Christ  to  the  Messiah 

Called  to  call 

Founder  to  foundation 

And  elimiiiatad 

Them  to  all  those 

Commandment  to  command- 
ments 

Behold  after  this  eliminated 

Before  to  behold 

And  eliminated 

After  that  I  eliminated 

The  to  their 

That  shall  publish  to  yea. 

State  of  awful  woundedness 
to  awful  state  of  blindness 

And  if  it  so  be  tiiat  they 
harden  not  their  hearts 
aa-ainst  the  Lamb  of  God 
eliminated 

If  it  so  be  that  to  and  if 

Of  God  eliminated 

Did  lose  me  not  to  did  not 
lose  me 


BOOK    OF   MORMON. 


43 


I  should  have  perished  ai^o 
eliminated 


II  BOOK  OF  NEPHI. 


30 


Which  to  who 

Th^it  to  who 

Sa'th  to  said 

Sayeth  to  said 

Saith  to  says 

Ti.ey  to  those 

Was  to  were 

weie  to  was 

Is  to  are  3 

Are  to  is 

Hath  to  has  14 

Hath  to, have  4 

Hast  to  have 

Thou  to  ye 

Tliinketh  to  thinks 

It  came  to  pass  that 

Th?.t  eliminated  30 

Eelongethto  belongs 

Cometh  to  comes 

And  eliminated 

Is  to  their 

Know  to  knows 

Wherefore  to  and 

Horner  to  homer 

Constrain  to  restrain 

From  to  of 

My  to  thy 

Of  eliminated 

Right  eliminated 

My  father  inserted 

Spake  to  spoken 

The  to  his 

Notwithstanding  eliminated 

That  ye  shall  to  have  him  to 

Do  eliminated 

That  they  should  to  to 

Therefore  eliminated 

Hath  me  to  has 

Them  eliminated 

Wherefore  eliminated 

Belie  veth  to  believe 

Come  to  came 

Appointed  to  opened 

Kindleth  to  kindle 

Bare  to  bear 

It  to  he  2 

Have  to  I 

If  it  it  so  he  that  eliminated 


Got  to  gotten 

AmoztoAmos  3 

Not  inserted 

Am  inserted  2 

Is  into  inserted 

Convert  to  be  converted 

And  to  that 

Remaliali  to  Remalia  5 

The  eliminated 

Aside  to  awny. 

Zion  to  Sion 

And  inserted 

Lands  to  h;nd 

Pad  eliminated 

Yieldeth  to  yield 

Founder  to  ifoundation         3 

Canseth  to  cause 

Unto  to  to 

Things  to  wcrds 

I  cannot  hope  to  can  I  hoie 

BOOK  OP  JACOB. 

Which  to  who  ^ 

Sayeth  to  said  35 

Saith  to  said  -4 

They  to  those 

Hath  to  has  -4 

Hath  to  have 

That  eliminated  5 

They  to  them 

Done  to  did 

Thev  to  the 

Ascendeth  to  nscend 

Shall  eliminated 

About  inserted 

To  it  eliminated 

Wherefore  el:minated 

Never  to  ever 

BOOK  OF  ENOS. 

That  eliminated 

And  the  words  of  my  fathtr 

eliminated 
Sayeth  to  said  3 

Not  to  never  before 
Passeth  to  pass 
It  eliminated 
Much  to  many 

BOOK  OF  J  ^Tt<  M. 

Which  to  who 


44 


CHANGKS    OF    THE 


^0 


BOOK  OF  OMNI. 

Not  eliminated 

WORDS  OF  MORMON. 

That  eliminated 

Has  to  have 

Wherefore    they  eliminated 


BOOK  OFMOSIAH. 

Which  to  who 

Which  to  whom 

Salth  to  said 

Was  to  were 

Is  to  are 

Hath  to  has 

Hath  to  have 

Hath  to  bad 

That  eliminated 

Done  to  did 

Any  to  no 

Doth  to  do 

Thou  to  ye 

Heholdest  to  beholi 

Flames  to  flame 

Dwelleth  to  dwell 

Drinketh  to  drink 

Believeth  to  believe 

Repenteth  to  repent 

Afflictions  to  affliction 

Has  to  have 

Hath  eliminated 

Spake  to  spoken 

Prophesying  to  prophecy 

Hast  to  has 

Desireth  to  desire 

Teachest  to  teach 

Knvowest  to  know 

Had  eliminated 

Sayest  to  say 

That  to  who 

That  to  and 

There  to  these 

Had  eliminated 

Rebelleth  to  rebel 

Dieth  to  die 

Hath  to  h  IS 

Desires  to  desire 

They  eliminated 

For  eliminated 

The  ones  who  to  which 

Benjaman  to  Mosiah 


It  came  to  pass  that  elim- 
inated 10 

Thee  to  you 

When  eliminated 

For  to  and 

May  to  mayest 

Them  to  those 

Sayeth  to  says 

Bepenteth  to  repents 

Commanding  to  commanded 

Much  to  many 

Remained  to  remain 

No  to  any 

Accoidingtothe  crime  which, 
he  hath  committed 

Cometh  to  comes 

Seeth  to  sees 

Remainet^  to  remains 

Had  nor  eliminated 

Not  inserted 

Their  to  his 

BOOK  OF  ALMA. 

Which  to  who 
Which  to  whom 
Which  to  when 
That  to  who 
Who  to  which 
Saith  to  said 
Sayeth  to  said 
Sayeth  to  say 
Was  to  were 
These  to  those 
Were  to  was 
Nor  to  or 
Is  to  are 
Hath  to  has 
Hath  to  have 
Hath  to  had 
That  eliminated 
Done  to  did 
Doth  to  do 
Doth  eliminated 
Had  eliminated 
Come  to  came 
They  to  them 
The  eliminated 
Him  to  he 
Being  to  were 
A  eliminated 
His  to  their 
Seeing  to  he  saw 


195 
13 


106 
2 


50 


10 
5T 
5 

4 
4 

3 


BOOK    OF    MORMON. 


45 


Now  eliminated 

Word  to  words 

h  or  eliminated  8 

Not  el  minated 

Up  eliminated 

Not  inserted 

He  eliiuinated  2 

Got  to  gotten 

And  to  but 

And  eliminated  4 

Art  to  is 

Whomsoever  to  whosoever  2 

Arriven  to  arrived 

Affections  to  affection 

Fell  to  fallen  2 

Binds  to  bind 

Slew  to  slain 

Suffer  to  succour 

To  to  at 

To  elminated 

It  came  to  pass  that  elim- 
inated 21 

Causeth  to  caused 

Know  to  known 

He  hath  to  has  he 

And  Amon  to  he 

Which   was   to    those    who 
were 

My  to  thy 

Judgeth  to  judged 

And  to  an 

Oweth  to  owed 

Desires  to  desire 

Receiveth  to  received 

Kind  to  kinds 

Answereth  to  answered 

Smote  to  smitten 

Durst  to  dare 

Their  to  our 

Had  not  ought  to  ought  not 

Having  to  have 

No  to  any 

And  to  now 

Arrest  to  wrest 

Becometh  to  becomes 

Also  eliminated 

Delighteth  to  delight 

Stronger  to  strong 

Was  also  to  also  was 

Thee  to  you 

Taking  to  taken 

Where  to  whence 

Respects  to  respect 


No  eliminated 

Even    as   with    power    and 

authority  eliminated 
Causeth  to  causes 
li  to  will 
Fell  to  fallen 
War  eliminated 
Art  to  are 

Humbleth  to  humble 
Might  to  may 
Promise  to  promises 
Nevertheless  eliminated 
Its  to  their 
To  eliminated 
Him  to  he 
Of  eliminated 
Became  to  become 
Cherubims  to  cherubim 
Therefore  eliminated 
And  Moroni  eliminated 
Came  to  come 
It  came  to  pass  that  Moroni 

and  his  army  elim  nated 
Have  fought  to  fight 
Saying  eliminated 
Wrote  to  written 
Devices  to  device 
Which  was  subsequent  to  to 

which  men  were  subject 
Son  to  sons 

BOOK  OF  HELAMAN. 

W^hich  to  who  96 

Which  to  whom  3 

That  to  who 

Saith  to  said 

Saith  to  say 

Them  to  those 

Was  to  were  6 

Were  to  was  3 

Is  to  are 

Is  to  art 

Hath  to  has  23 

Hath  to  have  4 

Doth  to  do  2 

They  to  those 

Those  to  these 

He  eliminated 

Neither  to  either 

Contentions  to  contention 

Nobler  to  robber 

Buildeth  to  build 


46 


CHANGES    OF    THE 


Fa  e  to  faces 

For  eliminated 

In  eliminated 

Whatsoever  was  eliminated 

Repentetli  to  repeilt 

Ways  to  way 

And  eliminated  5 

Hideth  to  bide 

Him  to  eliminated 

Mauy-day  to  many  days 

In  to  into 

Hideth  to  hide 

'Ireasiire  to  treasures 

Arriven  to  arrived 

Ye  will  eliminated 

Liayeth  to  lay 

Came  to  come 

Those  to  them 

III  BOOK  OF   NEPHI. 

Which  to  who  136 

Which  to  whom  15 

Sayeth  to  said  23 

S  lith  to  said  2 

Them  to  those  5 

Was  to  were  6 

Were  to  was  3 

Is  to  are  7 

Has  to  hath 

Hath  to  have  4 

That  elimmated  2 

They  to  those  6 

Them  to  those 
Them  to  they 
Sis^n  to  signal 

Which  was  between  the  land 
of  Zarahemla  and  the  elim- 
inated 
Were  to  had 
Testifies  to  testify 
Drank  to  drunk 
Of  which  to  whom 
Spake  to  spoken  5 

In  to  on 
Out  eliminated 
And  eliminated 
Repenteth  to  repent 
It  came  to  pass  eliminated 
Eat  to  eaten  2 

Their  to  his  3 

Healings  to  healing 
Wrote  to  written 


Had  eliminated 

Traveleth  to  travel 

Sufficiently  to  sufficient 

Gives  to  give 

To  get  gain  inserted 

Fof  to  get  gain  eliminated 

IV   BOOK  OF  NEPHI. 

^A^hich  to  Who  II 

They  to  those 

vv  as  to  were  2 

^^ere  to  was 

No  eliminated  3 

Their  el  miuated 

BOOK  OF  MORMON. 

Which  to  who  33 

Which  to  whom 

Saith  to  said 

That  to  who 

W  as  to  were  3 

vv  ere  to  was  .'^ 

Is  to  are  4 

They  to  those  3 

Hath  to  have  2 

That  eliminated 

A  eliminated 

This  to  these 

Tiiem  to  him 

Kumders  to  murders 

The  eliminated 

That  to  him 

Wiiich  eliminated 

Of  to  both 

Of  eliminated 

Beaz  to  Boaz 

I  eliminated 

Remaineih  to  remain 

Their  eliminated 

Not  eliminated 

They  have  to  he  has 

They  do  to  he  does 

That  which  eliminated 

The  eliminated 

None  to  no 

And  because  that  none  other 
people  knoweth  our  lan- 
guage eliminated 

BOOK  OF  ETHER. 


Which  to  who 
Which  to  whom 


47 


BOOK    OF   MORMON. 


47' 


Saiih  lo  said 
Was  to  were 
"Were  to  was 
Is  to  are 
Hath  to  has 
That  eliminated 
Speake  h  to  speaks 
Of  eliminated 
Clowd  to  cloud 
The  elimina'^ed 
Decree  to  decrees 
This  to  these 
Not  eliminated 
For  eliminated 
Knew  to  might  know 
Benjaman  to  Mosiah 
vv  rote   o  written 
Them  to  him 
He  elminated 
The  eliminated 
In  the  which  to  and 
Much  to  many- 
Slew  to  slain 
A  eliminated 
Avenu:eth  to  avenge 
The  Lord  to  He 
In  the  to  by 
In  the  to  with 


12 

2 


Do  eliminated 
VVhereuntoto  but 
Did  to  didst 

Kememberest  to  remember 
How  eliminated 
Dwelleth  to  dwell 
Garment  to  garments 
They  eliminated 

BOOK  OF  MORONI. 

Which  to  Who  6 

That  to  who  .  2 

Was  to  were  *  2 

Hath  to  has  2 

Hath  to  have 

That  eliminated  8 

Doth  to  do 

Surely  to  sure 

They  to  those 

Needeth  to  need  2 

Of  eliminated 

Had  not  ought  to  ought  not 

The  eliminated 

Has  to  have 

And  eliminated 

Comes  to  come 


We  present  a  few  sentences  with 
the  changes  in,  that  the  reader  can  see 
how  the  changes  appear  in  the  book: 

"Which"  to  **Who"  and  **They"  to  Those." 
I  NEPHI  22:  23.  For  the  time  speedily  shall 
come,  that  all  churches  which  are  built  up  to  ge* 
gain,  and  all  those  who  [they  which]  are  built  up  to 
get  power  over  the  flesh  and  those  who  [they  which] 
are  built  up  to  become  popular  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world,  and  those  who  [they  which]  seek  the  lusts  of 
the  flesh  and  the  things  of  the  world,  and  to  do  all 
manner  of  iniquity;  yea,  in  fine,  all  those  who  [they 


48  CHANGES    OF    THE 

which]  belong  to  the  klngrdou  of  tie  devil,  are  th^y 
who[which]  need  fear  and  q  i  .ke;  thy  are  those  who 
[they  which]  oiiat  be  brought  low  in  the  dust;  ihey 
are  those  who  [they  which]  must  he  consumed  as 
stubblp;  and  this  is  accordiDg  to  t' e  words  of  the 
prophet. 

ALMA  57:  18-27.  Those  men  whom  [which]  we 
s^n^.  And  tho^»^  m-  n  who  [which]  had  been  selected. 
My  men  who  [which]  had  benn  wounded.  Out  of  my 
two  thousand  and  sixty,  who  [which]  had  fainted. 
N 't  one  poul  of  them  who  [which]  did  perish;  yea» 
and  neither  was  th^re  one  soul  amon.?  them  who 
[which]  had  not  received  many  wounds.  Our  breth- 
r'»n  who  [which]  were  sUiu.  No  v  thii  was  the  faith 
of  those  of  whom  [which] 

in  NEPHl  6:  21.  Now  there  were  mai.y  of  the 
people  who  [which]  were  excepding  angry  because  of 
those  who  [which]  testified  uf  the^e  tilings;  and  those 
who  [which]  were  angry  werechiedy  the  chief  judges, 
ai'd  ihey  who  [which]  had  been  hi^h  priests  and  law- 
yerfs,  all  those  who  [they  which]  wfre  lav.ynp,  were 
angry  with  those  who  [which]  trf-tifitd  of  ihese 
things. 

23.  X>w  there  were  many  of  tiiof^e  who  [which] 
tes^id  d  of  the  things  pertaining  to  Chriht,  who 
[which]  testifltd  boldly,  who  [which]  were  taken  and 
put  to  death   ecret'y  by  the  judges,  that  the  knowl- 


BOOK    OF    MORMON.  49 

pdge  of  their  death  came  pot  unto  the  govercor  of 
the  land,  until  after  their  death. 

"Saith"  to  '*Said." 

•  JACOB  7:9.  And  I  said  [sayeth]  unto  him,  Deni- 
est  thou  the  Christ  who  should  come?  And  he  said 
[sayeth],  If  there  should  be  a  Christ,  I  would  not  deny 
him;  but  I  know  that  there  is  no  Christ,  neither  has 
been,  nor  ever  [never]  will  be. 

10.  And  I  said  [sayeth]  unto  htm,  Bellevest  thou 
the  scriptures?    And  he  said  [sayeth],  Yea. 

11.  And  I  said  [sayeth]  unto  him, 

ALMA  45:  2.  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  nine- 
teenth year  of  the  reign  of  the  judgf  s  over  the  peo- 
ple of  Nephi,  that  Alma  came  to  his  son  Helaman 
and  said  [saith]  unto  him,  Bplievest  thou  the  words 
which  I  spake  unto  thee  concerning  those  records 
which  have  been  kept? 

3.  And  Helaman  said  [saith]  unto  him,  Yea,  I 
believe. 

4.  And  Alma  said  [saith]  again,  Believest  thou  in. 
Jesus  Christ,  who  [which]  shall  come? 

5.  And  he  said  [saith],  Yea,  I  believe  all  the  words 
which  thou  hast  spoken. 

6.  And  Almy  said  [saith]  unto  him  agsir,  Will  ye 
keep  my  commandments? 


50  CHANGES  ^OF    THK 

7.  And  he  said,  Yea  I  will  keep  thy  commaad- 
ment8  with  all  ray  heart. 

8.  And  Alina  said  [saith]  unto  him,  Blessed  art 
thou; 

Double  Negatives. 

1INEPHI33:  9.  Bat  behold,  for  noae  of  these 
can  I  hope  [I  cannot  hope], 

OMNI  1: 17.  Aad  Mosiah,  nor  the  people  of  Mosiah, 
could  ]not]  understand  them. 

MOSIAH  3: 17.  That  there  shall  be  no  other  name 
given,  nor  any  [no]  other  way  nor  means  whereby  * 

29: 14.    Nor  any  [no]  manner  of  iniquity: 

ALMA  29:  2.  That  there  raighj  not  be  [no]  more 
sorrow  upon  all  the  face  of  the  earth. 

23:  7.  That  they  did  not  fight  against  God  any  [no] 
more, 

HELAMAN  1:  31.  And  now  behold  the  Lamanites 
could  not  retreat  either  [neither]  way; 

Miscellaneous. 

I  NEPHI  8:  7.And  it  came  topass  that  as  I  followed 
him,  [and  after  I  had  followed  him]  I  beheld  myself 
that  I  was  in  a  dark  and  dreary  waste. 

11: 13.  I  beheld  a  virgin,  and  she  was  exceedingly 
[exceeding]  fair  and  white. 

18.    And  he  said  unto  me.  Behold  the  virgin  whom 


BOOK    OF   MORMON.  5  I 

[which]  thou  seest,  is  the  mother  of  the  son  of  Grod; 
after  the  manner  of  the  fle-h. 

21 .  And  the  angel  said  unto  me,  Behold  the  Lamb 
of  God;  Yey,  even  the  son  of  the  Eternal  Father. 

32.  And  I  looked  and  beheld  the  Lamb  of  God, 
that  he  was  taken  by  the  people;  yea,  the  son  of 
the  everlasting  God  was  jodgedof  the  world. 

13:  32.  Neither  will  the  Lord  God  suffer  that  the 
Gentiles  shall  for  ever  remain  in  that  awful  state  of 

blindness  [state  of  awful  woundedness)  Which  thou 
beholde^t  (that)  they  are  in  becauso  of  the  plain  and 
most  precious  parts  of  the  go?pel  of  the  Lamb  which 
have(hath)b2en  kfpt  back  by  that  abominable  church, 
whose  foundation  thou  hast  seen. 

II  NEPHI  5:  3.  Our  younger  brother  thinks  (think- 
eth)  to  rule  over  us.  *  ^  We  will  not  have  him  to 
(that  he  shall)  be  oar  ruler;  for  it  belongs  (belongeth ) 
unto  us,  who  (which)  are  the  elder  brethren  to  rule 
over  this  people. 

15.  And  I  did  teach  my  people,  to  (that  they  should 
build  buildings. 

17.  And  it  came  to  pass  that  I,  Nephi,  did  cause 
my  people  to  (that  they  should)  be  industrious,  and 
to  (that  they  should)  labor  with  their  hands. 

II  NEPHI  8:  ISAIAH  51:  9.  Awake,  awf  I  f  IPnt  on 
strength,  Oarm  of  the  Lord;  awake  as  in  tlie  ancient 


52  CHANGES    OF    THE 

days.  Art  thou  uot  he  (it)  that  hath  cat  Rahab, 
wounded  the  dragooV 

10.  Art  thou  not  he  who  (it  which)  hath  dried  the 
sea. 

23.  But  I  will  put  it  into  the  hand  of  them  that 
afflict  thee  who  have  (which  I)  said  to  thy  soul. 

nNEPHI12:  ISIAH2:  9.  Aud  the  mean  man 
boweth  not  down,  and  the  great  man  humbleth  him- 
self not,  therefore  forgive  him  not. 

M03IAH  i8:  8.  Here  are  (is)  the  waters  of  M  )rmon. 

10.  If  this  be  the  desire  (desires)  of  your  hearts. 

11.  This  ia  the  desire  (desires)  of  our  hearts. 

ALMA  i:  30.  And  thus  in  their  prosperous  circum- 
stances, they  did  not  send  away  any  who  were  (which 
was)  naked,  or  that  were  (was)  hungry,  or  that  were 
(was)  athirst,  or  that  were  (was)  sick. 

i7.  And  now  the  law  could  have  no  power  on  any 
man  for  his  (their)  belief. 

2:  lO.  And  this  he  did  (done)  that  he  might  sub- 
ject them  to  him. 

12.  Therefore  the  people  of  the  Nephites  were 
(was)  aware  of  the  intent  of  the  Amlicites,  and 
therefore  they  did  prepare  (for)  to  meet  them. 

10:  7.    Ail   was  (a)  joarneyiag. 

8.    And  as  I  was  (a)  going  thither. 

30:  56.    Bat  he  was  cast  out,  and  went  about  from 


BOOK    OF   MORMON.  53 

honse  to  house  (a)  begging  for  his  food. 

58.  And  Korihor  did  go  about  from  house  to  house 
(a)  begging  for  his  support. 

Please  note — there  are  2038 
places  changed.  That  tliey  are  correct- 
ing the  coniinonest  kinds  of  grammat- 
ical errors.  The  number  of  botli  nouns 
and  verbs  is  changed.  Adjectives  are 
changed  for  adverbs.  The  tense  of 
veri)s  is  changed.  Superfluous  words 
and  clauses  are  eliminated.  Words 
and  clauses  are  added  to  complete  or 
amend  the  sentence.  Pronouns  are 
changed.  The  ancient  formis changed 
to  the  modern  in  hundreds  of  places, 
sometimes  as  many  as  thirteen  times 
on  a  single  page.  Sometimes  the  word 
''saith"  is  spelled  ^'sayeth^'. 

A  passing  uotice  of  the  pages  of 
changes  is  not  snfficient  if  we    wish    to 

[NOTE — The  parts  set  in  light  face  type  and  enclosed  in 
brackets  have  been  eliminated  since  the  first  edition,  in  1833. 
The  parts  set  in  light  face  type  and  not  enclosed  in  brackets 
have  been  added  since  the  first  edition.] 


54  CHANGES    OF    THE 

understand  how  the  book  has  been  re- 
vised. In  fact  one  cannot  realize  t!ie 
extent  of  the  changes  unless  he  can 
see  a  book  witli  the  changes  marked. 
While  in  some  of  the  illustrative  sen- 
tences quoted  the  mistakes  are  some- 
what thicker  than  the  average,  it  will 
be  noticed  that  there  must  be  an 
average  of  almost  four  to  the  page. 
The  changes  are  less  frequent  in  the 
parts  claimed  to  have  been  taken  from 
the  plates  brought  from  Jerusalem 
when  King  James  has  it  in  his  transla- 
tion too.  This  makes  the  average  ^of 
original  parts  greater.  The  phrase, 
^'It  came  to  pass"  has  been  stricken  out 
in  a  number  of  places. 


Some  people  may  think  I  am  pre- 
sumptuous to  write  under  such  a  head- 
ing as  the  above,  because  I  have  not 
had  a  college  education,  and  understand 
no  tongue  but  the  English,  and  that 
very  impefectly.  But  let  it  be  here 
suggested  that  we  often  have  things 
to  investigate  that  we  are  not  professors 
of.  In  fact  there  are  so  few  people  who 
master  more  than  one  branch  of  science 
that  were  it  not  for  this  fact  we  v/ould 
not  be  allowed  to  speak  npon  the  general 
subjects  of  the  day.  But  as  a  matter  of 
fact  we  are  surrounded  by  things  and 
subjects  that  we  must,  in  part  at  least, 
make  up  our  minds  on — we  must  pass 
an  opinion. 


56  TRANSLATION 

As  a  rule  there  is  a  way  for  any  of 
us  to  investigate  any  subject  we  need, 
and  obtain  a  fair  understanding  of  it. 
We  will  get  at  it  in  our  way.  vSo  in 
investigating  the  subject  before  us,  it  is 
not  necessary  for  one  to  go  through  the 
various  languages  and  understand  all 
the  ^4ns"  and  ^^outs"  of  translation. 

Usually  there  is  some  special  object 
to  be  attained  in  presenting  a  subject, 
and  often  that  object  can  be  attained  by 
investigating  only  a  small  part  of  the 
great  field  that  wonld  occupy  the  mind 
of  a  careful  student  or  scientist.  So 
with  the  work  at  hand.  The  object  be- 
ing to  see  if  the  grammatical  errors 
which  may  have  been  made  by  the 
Nephites  could,  would  or  should  have 
been  reproduced  in  the  English  transla- 
tion of  our  times. 

The  ancient    writers    confess    their 
ignorance  of  writing  and    apoligize  to 


TRANSLATION.  57 

tills  generation.  If  the  book  is  what 
it  purports  to  be,  we  should  excuse  and 
most  heartily  thank  them  for  having 
done  the  best  they  could  for  our  in- 
formation.    We  give  their    apology. 

INEPHI  1:  1.  I,  Npphi,  having  been  born  of 
goodly  parents,  therefore  I  was  taught  somewhat  in 
aU  the  learning  of  my  father;  and  having  seen  many 
afflictions  in  the  course  of  my  days  -nevertheless, 
having  been  highly  favored  of  the  Lord  in  all  my 
days;  yea,  having  had  a  great  knowledge  of  the  good- 
ness and  the  mysteries  of  God,  therefore  I  make  a 
record  of  my  proceedings  in  my  days; 

2.  Yea,  I  make  a  record  in  the  language  of  my 
father,  which  consists  of  the  learning  of  the  Jews, 
and  the  language  of  the  Egfyptians. 

3.  And  I  fenow  that  the  record  which  I  make  is 
true;and  I  make  it  with  mine  own  hand;  and  I  make 
it  according  to  my  knowledge. 

MORMON  9:  31.  Condemn  me  not  because  of 
mine  imperfection;  neither  my  father,  because  of  his 
imperfection ;  neither  them  who  (which)  have  written 
before  him,  but  rather  give  thanks  unto  God  that  he 
hath  made  manifest  unto  you  our  imperfections,  that 
ye  may  learn  to  be  more  wise  than  (that  which)  we 
have  been. 


58  TRANSLATION\ 

32.  And  now  behold,  we  have  writ- 
ten this  record  according  to  our  knowledge  in  the 
character?,  which  are  called  amocg  ns  the  reformf  d 
Egyptian,  being  handed  down  and  altered  by  us  ac- 
cording to  our  manner  of  speech. 

33.  And  if  our  plates  had  been  sufficiently  large, 
we  should  have  written  in  (the)  Hebrew;  but  the 
Hebrew  hath  been  altered  by  us  also;  and  if  we  could 
have  written  in  (the)  Hebrew,  behold,  ye  would  have 
had  no  (none)  imperfection  in  our  record. 

34.  But  the  Lord  fenoweth  the  things  which  we 
have  written,  and  alf=o  that  none  other  people  knoweth 
our  language,  (and  because  that  none  other  people 
knoweth  our  language,)  therefore  he  hath  prepared 
means  for  the  interpretation  th^^reof, 

35.  And  these  things  are  written,  that  we  may 
rid  our  garments  of  the  blood  of  our  brethren  who 
(which)  have  dwindled  in  unbelief. 

MORMON  8:12.  And  whoso  receiveth  this  record 
and  shall  not  condemn  it  because  of  the  imperfec- 
tions which  are  in  it,  the  same  shall  know  of  greater 
things  than  these.  Behold,  I  am  Moroni;  and  were  it 
possible,  I  would  make  all  things  known  unto  you, 

17.  And  if  there  be  faults,  they  be  the  faults  of  a 
man.  Bat  behold,  we  know  no  fault.  Nevertheless 
God  kaovvoth  all  things;  therefore  he  that  coademu- 
eth,  let  him  be  aware  lest  he  shall  be  in  danger  of 
heHfire. 


TRANSLATION.  59 

Seven  sentences  have  been  selected 
from  the  first  edition  of  the  Book  of 
Mormon,  containing  a  variety  of  mis- 
takes which  have  been  corrected. 
Copies  of  these  sentences  were  sent  to 
Professors  of  languages  with  the  simple 
request  to  translate.  One  was  asked 
to  translate  into  German,  another  into 
French,  and  tlie  other  into  Latin.  The 
last  two  were  kindly  furnished,  but  the 
German  did  not  come.  We  illustrate 
our  point  with  the  two. 

Other  Professors  w^ere  now  asked  to 
translate  the  Latin  and  French  back 
into  English.  So  we  here  submit  the 
three  Englishes,  the  Latin  and  the 
French. 

From  the  First  Edition. 

1.  ^^The  servant  done  according  to 
his  word.'' 

2.  ^^The  Lord  of  the  vineyard  saith 
again  unto  his  servant." 


6o  TRANSLATION. 

3.  '^He  had  been  a  preparing  the 
minds  of  the  people.'' 

4.  ^'He  was  acknowledged  king 
thronghout  all  the  land,  among  all  the 
people  of  the  Lamanites,  which  was 
composed  of  the  Lanianites." 

5.  'I  have  wrote  unto  yon." 

6.  ''I  trnst  that  the  sonls  of  them 
which  has  been  slain,  have  entered  into 
the  rest  of  their  God." 

7.  ''They  retreated  into  the  wilder- 
ness again,  yea,  even  back  the  same 
way  which  they  had  come." 

From  the  Latin. 

1.  ''The  servant  did  it  from  his  own 
faith." 

2.  The  master  of  the  vineyard 
speaks  again  to  his  servant." 

3.  ''He  had  prepared  the  minds  of 
the  people." 

4.  "He  is  called  a  king  nnto  all  the 
land  among  the  whole  people  of  the 
Lamanites  who  stand  among  the 
Lamanites." 

5.  "I  wrote  to  yon." 


TRANSLATION.  6  [ 

6.  ^^I  hope  the  souls  of  those  who 
were  killed  have  entered  into  the  peace 
of  their  God.'' 

7.  The}^  again  betook  themselves 
into  the  desert  places;  thus,  even  back 
in  the  very    way    by   which    they    had 


come." 


From  the  French. 

• 

1.  "The  servant  acted  according  to 
his  word.'' 

2.  "The  master  of  the  vine \  ard 
said  again  to  his  servant." 

3.  "He  had  prepared  the  minds  of 
the  people." 

4.  "He  was  recognized  as  king 
throughout  all  the  country  among  all 
the  people  of  the  Lamanites." 

5.  "I  have  written  to  you." 

6.  "I  believe  that  the  souls  of  those 
who  have  been  killed  have  entered  into 
the  repose  of  their  God." 

7.  "Tliey  withdrew  again  into  the 
desert;  yea,  by  the  same  route  over 
which  they  had  come." 


62  TRANSLATION. 

French. 

1.  Le  serviteur  agit  selon  sa  parole. 

2.  Le  iiiaitre  de  la  vigne  dit  encore 
a  son  serviteur. 

3.  II  avait  prepare  les  esprits  du 
peuple. 

4.  II  etait  reconnu  comnie  roi  tout 
au  travers  du  pays,  parnii  tout  le 
peuple  des  Lanianites. 

5.  Je  vous  ai  ecrit. 

6.  Je  crois  que  les  anies  de  ceux  qui 
out  ete  tues,  sont  entres  dans  le  repos 
de  leur  Dieu. 

7  lis  se  sont  retires  encore  dans 
le  desert,  oui,  par  la  nieme  route  sur 
laquelle  ils  etaient  venus. 

Latin, 

1.  Servus  ex  fide  suo  fecit. 

2.  Dominus  vineae  servo  suo  iterum 
dicit. 

3.  Animos  populorum  praepar- 
averat. 

4.  lUe  rex  appellatur  in  terrani 
totam  inter  omnem  populum  Lamini- 
tum  qui  in  Laminitibus  constitit. 


TRANSLATION.  63 

5.      Ad  te  scripsi. 

b.  Spero  aninios  illoruui  qui  necati 
sunt  in  paceni  Dei  suoruni  inisse. 

7.  lu  loca  deserta  iteruiii  se  recep- 
eru:it;  ita,  etiaui  retro  in  via  ipsa  qua 
venerant. 

At  this  point  it  is  quite  probable  that 
some  readers  would  enjoy  a  criticism  of 
the  grammatical  construction  of  the 
original  sentences,  and  since  it  was 
furnished  by  the  professors  who'trans- 
lated,  we  feel  equal  to  the  occasion. 

One  of  them  very  niodestly  said,  ^'If 
you  will  allow  me  first  to  correct  the 
English  of  some  of  the  sentences  that 
you  sent  I  will  endeavor  to  translate 
them  into  French." 

But  tlie  other  goes  further  and    tells 
where  each  sentence  is  wanting. 
The  English  Criticised. 

'^My  second  comment  must  be  a  severe 
criticism  on  the  grammar  of  the  sen- 
tences submitted.    The  errors  are  of  so 


64  TRANSLATION. 

gross  a  nature  as  to  show  great  igiio- 
rance  on  the  part  of  the  original  user  of 
the  expressions  or  of  one  who  habitually 
euiplo3'S  them. 

The  error  in  the  first  consists  in  the 
use  of  a  perfect  participle   for  the  past- 
tense  form.      At  no  time  in  the  history 
of  the   English   language  was    such    a 
usa^^e  permitted.  So    far  as    I    am   ac- 
quainted with  other  languages    this  is 
not  now  aud  never   was    permitted    in 
them;  and  if  a  translation  of  the    Eng- 
lish as  submitted  be  insisted  upon,   all 
I  can  say  is  that  it  can  not  be  translated. 
The  second  is  correct. 
The  third    while    not   positively    in- 
correct is  at  least  inelegant  in  the  use  of 
^a    preparing',   ^a'    being  a  preposition 
and  ^preparing',    a  gerund,    its    object. 
Before  translating,    the   ^'a'^    must   be 
stricken  out. 

The  error  in  the  forth  is  in  the  use 
of  the  singular  verb  ^was'  with  a  plural 
subject  Vhich',  referring  to  'all  peo- 
ple'. The  sentence  is  otherwise  clumsy. 
In  no  language  does  a  plural  word   as 


TRANSLATION. 65 

a  subject  take  a  singular  predicate. 

The  error  in  the  fifth  is  in  the  use 
of  a  past-tense  form  'wrote'  for  a  per- 
fect participle  ^written'.  This  is  no- 
where permitted. 

The  sixth  also  contains  a  plural  sub- 
ject, Svhich'  with  a  singular  predicate, 
4ias  been    slain'. 

The  seventh  is  clumsy  in  the  omis- 
sion of  needed  prepositions  before  ^same 
way'  a'ld  before    Svhich'   respectively." 

Som^  people  whD  are  acquaiiitei  with 
langu  igeaud  caa  see  at  a  glance  where 
the  English  of  the  first  edition  is  faulty, 
may  think  we  are  pursuing  these  little 
matters  just  to  fill  up  space.  But  the 
CKperience  had  up  to  date  is  of  such  a 
nature  as  to  demand  the  chasing  of  every 
little  point  of  evidence  until  it  vanishes 
in  the  distance.  Neighbors, and  those  too, 
who  hold  the  respect  of  all  on  political 
and  financial  matters,  say  our  language 
is  continually    undergoing    a    change 


66  TRANSLATION. 

and  probably  it  was  translated  correctly 
into  the  language  as  it  was  then,  but  has 
simply  been  changed  since  to  keep  pace 
with  a  progressive  language.  But  hear 
what  our  Professor  says  of  the  first  sen- 
tence^'Atno  time  in  the  history  of  the 
English  language  was  such  a  usage  per- 
mitted. So  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with 
other  languages  this  is  not  now  and 
never  was  permitted  in  them."  Also  in 
criticising  the  fourth  he  says.'^In  no  lan- 
guage does  a  plural  word  as  a  subject  take 
a  singular  predicate."  And  in  the  fifth. 
'^This  is  nowhere  permitted." 

If  our  informant  knows  what  he  is 
talking  about,  any  little  consolation  that 
our  neighbors  might  borrow  from  the 
thought  that  the  book  was  translated  in- 
to correct  English  at  first  will  have  to 
vanish  as  the  manna  of  the  Israelites 
did  after  sunrise  on  all  week-days. 

Another  point  in  connection  with  the 


TRANSLATION.  67 

criticism  of  the  first  sentence  is   worth 
our  consideration. 

'If  a  translation  of  the  English  as 
submitted  be  insisted  upon,  all  I  can 
say  is  that  it  cannot  be  translated." 
And  our  other  linguist  said,  If  I  would 
allow  him  to  first  correct  the  English 
he  would  translate. 

If  it  were  ever  so   great  a  crime    to 
wonder,  my  mind  is  so  framed    that    I 
can     not     avoid     wondering  what  the 
apology    of  the  ancient    writers  of  the 
B.  of  M  amounts  to.     It  is  calculated  to 
account  for  the  bad  grammar.     But  our 
modern   students  of    language  cannot 
translate  such  grammatical  errors  from 
one  language   to  another.    If  we  will 
now  turn  back  and  compare  the    Eng- 
lishes,   we   will    see    that    while    they 
differ  a  little  from  each  other  the  gram- 
matical   errors  have    been   eliminated. 
Even  those  needed  prepositions  in  the 


68  TRANSLATION. 

seventh  have  been  supplied.  From  the 
French  we  get  ^'by"  and  ^'over".  From 
the  Latin  we  get  ^'in"  and  '^by'\ 

Referring  to  the  matter  of  translat- 
ing grammatical  errors,  one  of  the 
Professors  informs  me  that  there  are 
some  kinds  of  errors,  that  can  be  trans- 
late! from  one  language  into  another, 
but  further  said  that  if  his  students  were 
translating  a  sentence  with  agrainmat- 
ical  error  in  it  he  would  expect  them 
first  t)  correct  the  error,  unless  it  was 
a  slang  phrase  which  depended  upon 
the  error  for  its  significance. 

Besides  criticising  the  sentences  our 
Professjr  tells  us  briefly  but  plainlj^ 
what  a  translation  is. 

''My  first  statement  must  be  an  expla- 
nation of  a  translation.  It  is  not  an 
exact  setting  over,  word  for  word,  from 
one  language  to  another;  but  the  using 
of  such  expressions  in  one  language  as 


TRANSLATION.  69 

conveys  the  same  idea  to  one  who  speaks 
that  language  as  the  words  of  anotlier 
language  c^)nveys  to  one  who  speaks 
that  other  language.  Thus  ^How  do 
you  do'  conveys  the  same  idea  to  an 
American  as  'Wie  geht's'  conveys  to  a 
German;  but  the  word  for  word  equiva- 
lent in  Euglish  of  the  German  form  is» 
^How  goes  it'.  Any  Latiu  equivalent 
for  English  expressions  mnst  be  of  the 
same  natnre.'' 

We  wish  here  to  call  atteutiou  to  the 
fact  that  a  translation  is  not  a  ^Svord 
for  word'' setting  over  from  one  lauguage 
to  another, bnt  it  is  simply  conveyingthe 
tlionghts  of  one  langnage  in  words  con- 
veying the  same  thoughts  in  the  other. 
If  we  will  compare  our  French,  Latin  and 
English  we  will  observe  that  the  words 
look  nothing  alike,  we  may  be  sure  that 
they  would  sound  nothing  alike 
if  spoken.  And  all  of  us  have 
seen      enough     foreigners     who     mix 


70  TRANSLATION. 

up  the  grammatical  parts  of  the 
sentence  in  such  a  way  that  we 
may  know  that  the  parts  of  speech  are 
differently  arranged.  In  fact  the  con- 
struction of  the  whole  language  is  dif- 
ferent. This  being  true  what  excuse  is 
there  for  the  thousands  of  grammatical 
errors  in  the  first  edition  of  tlie  book 
which  God  himself  condescends  to  trans- 
late that  we  might  have  his  law  in  its 
purity?  Why  should  He  inspire  his 
servants  to  write  the  following  article  of 
faith?  "We  believe  the  Bible  to  be  the 
word  of  God,  as  far  as  it  is  translated 
correctly;  we  also  believe  the  Book  of 
Mormon  to  be  the  word  of  God''.? 

Please  note  in  this  article  not  one 
word  of  allowance  is  made  for  wrong 
translation  of  the  B.  of  M. 

Is  such  a  work  a  marvel  and  a  wonder 
in  any  other  sense  than  that  men  would 
prepare      it      and       that      so      manj'^ 


1:^RANSLATION.  7 1 

would  believe  it  came  from  God.  This 
WE  are  willing  to  admit  is  marvelous; 
and  when  superficially  examined  I 
felt  like  exclaiming  in  the  language  of 
King  Agrippa,  ^^Almost  thou  persuad- 
est  me  to  believe". 

We  might  now,  with  profit,  return  to 
page  20  and  again  consider  Martin 
Harris'  statement,  that  tlie  plates  were 
translated  in  precisely  the  same  langu- 
age that  was  used  by  the  ancients.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  we  thought  he 
could  not  have  understood  what  he  was 
saying.  That  he  did  not  know  the 
meaning  of  his  own  words.  The  idea 
we  have  is,  for  this  to  be  true,  the 
^^Refornied  Egyptian, '^  which  was  cut 
loose  from  civilization  twentj-four 
hundred  years  ago,  must  have  developed 
into  a  grammatical  construction  very 
similar  to  that  of  the  English  language 
of  to-day.     They   may    have  had  word 


72  TRANSLATION. 

signs  whicli  differed  from  ours  in  ap- 
pearance, and  when  these  words  were 
sonnded  they  may  not  have  been  recog- 
nizable to  an  ear  nsed  to  the  English 
words  only.  But  the  arrangement  of 
the  parts  of  speech  must  have  been 
similar.  This  is  not  al  1,  indeed  it  is  not 
the  half.  They  mnst  have  liad  become 
accnstomed  to  making  the  same  kinds 
of  grammatical  errors  that  were  common 
in  Joseph's  time.  Fnrthermore,  they 
must  have  nsed  the  relative  pnmoun 
"which"  for  'Svho'^  just  as  the  trans- 
lators of  the  Bible  did  two  hundred  for- 
ty years  before,  which  was  good  English 
at  that  time,  but  was  not  allowablein  the 
days  of  Joseph  Smith.  They  must 
have  been  in  the  habit  of  using  a  sup- 
erfluous "a"  as  illustrated  in  our  last 
four  illustrative  sentences,  pages  52-3. 
Double  negatives,  which  are  directly 
contrarj^  in  letter   to  the  spirit  of  the 


TRANSLATION.  73 

sentence,  a  common  error  among  us. 
must  have  been  common  then  also. 
In  fact  tlie  errors  resemble  back-v/oods 
English  so  closely  that  one  would  be 
justified  in  rejecting  the  whole  work  on 
that  one  point  alone,  until  conclusive 
evidence  to  the  contrary  is  produced. 

We  do  not  wish  to  say  positively 
that  it  is  impossible  for  a  language  to 
have  been,  at  that  time,  similar  to  the 
English  of  to-da}^  Yes  it  might  Iiave 
included  the  local  peculiarities  of  Jos- 
eph's neighborhood.  God  is  p'ctured 
to  us  as  possessing  all  power.  So  of 
course  he  could  by  special  design  cause 
the  ancient  inhabitants  of  America  to 
acquire  a  language  of  any  kind  He  saw 
fit.  But  we  do  wish  to  express  an 
opinion  that  nothing  short  of  special 
interposition  of  the  hand  of  Providence 
would  have  produced  a  language,  which, 
when  translated  ^'precisely  in  the  Ian- 


m 


74  TRANSLATION. 

guage  then  used/'  ^Vorrect  in  every  par- 
ticular/' would  resemble  the  English 
of  Joseph's  day;  and  even  include  such 
little  grammatical  errors  as  an  illiterate 
person  of  Joseph's  day  would  be  sure  to 
use  if  he  wrote  his  own  thoughts  in  his 
own  way.  If  the  work  be  true  we  have 
a  circumstance,  the  like  of  which  has 
never  before  been  discovered  in  all 
the  research  of  modem  scientists. 

We  give  below  what  we  think  the 
first  edition  should  have  been,  coming 
from  the  source  it  is  clainjed  to  have 
come  from.  In  this  consideration  we 
allows  that  the  ancient  wiiteis  of  the 
book  may  have  been  ever  so  illiterate; 
and  their  w^ork  may  have  been  ever  so 
full  of  errors.  The  urini  and  thummim 
should  have  brought  up  tlie  thoughts 
of  the  ancients.  And  even  if  these 
thoughts  were  originally  clothed  in 
language  full  of   ambiguity  it    should 


TRANSLATION.  75 

have  appeared  on    the  urim  and  thiiiii- 
mini     in    perfect  English.     We    must 
ever  bear  in  mind  that  a  translation    is 
not  a  setting  over  of   words.     It    deals 
with  thoughts.     And  be  it  remembered 
that  God  was    prodncing    a    marvelous 
w^ork  and   a  wonder.     The    wisdom   of 
the  wise  was  to  be  hid  because  He   was 
going  to  so  far  surpass   it.     The   Book 
of  Mormon,  then  should    have    been    a 
model  of  perfection.     It   shonld    liave 
stood  out  alone, a  solitary  pinnacle  wliicli 
linguists  would  have  peeped  at  throngli 
a  telescope  from  afar.     It  should    have 
been    a   book    wdiich    educators   would 
have  taken  into    the    school  room  from 
one  end  of  civilization  totheother.     No 
this   is  not  asking    too    much.     Shak- 
speare  has  stood  out  an  unapproachable 
pinnacle  in  his  line  for  centuries.     And 
while  he  seems  might}^  to  the   scholars 
of  today,  he  should  have  been  a    mere 


76  TRANSLATION. 

speck  when  compared  with  tlie  work  of 
Almighty  God.  The  language  of  the 
Book  of  Mormon  should  have  been  ab- 
solutely perfect.  In  ever}^  case  the 
veiy  best  word  for  the  place  should 
have  been  used.  Linguists  tell  us  that 
there  are  no  synonyms,  but  that  there 
is  a  fine  shade  of  difference  of  meaning 
in  all  English  words.  This  book,  then 
Avould  have  been  a  miue  of  treasures. 
All  the  fine  shades  of  meaning  would 
have  been  displayed  by  God  Himself, 
and  all  edticated  people  would  have 
praised  the  book  forever  more. 
Because  any  other  meaning  except 
the  proper  one  would  be  impossible. 
Not  a  word  could  have  been 
eliminated,  added  nor  exchanged  for 
another  without  inflicting  an  injury 
on  the  book.  There  would  have  been 
no  call  for  such  a  remark  as  Elder 
Roberts     made      in       the     Bountiful 


TRANSLATION.  77 

meeting  house  in  the  presence 
of  President  Joseph  F.  Smith,  at  the 
quarterly  conference,  in  March,  1897; 
tliat  he  wished  the  book  had  been 
clianged  (amended)  more  More  than 
two-thousand  amendments  had  already 
been  made,  which  improved  the  book 
very  much,  and  still  God's  translation 
is  in  such  a  shape  that  Elder  Roberts 
wishes  they  had  amended  it  more. 

It  may  be  urged  by  some  that  had 
this  been  the  case  it  would  be  claimed 
that  an  educated  person  did  it,  and  the 
book  would  be  disbelieved  on  that  ac- 
count. But  to  this  we  would  reply, 
that  tlie  claim  is  made  that  the  ^^ALL 
WISE  did  do  it.  No  danger  of  men 
saying  that  man  did  it.  For  it  would 
have  so  far  surpassed  any  thing  man 
had  done  or  could  do  that  they  would  be 
obliged  to  look  higher  than  man  for  the 
source.     Now  men  say  it  was  so  full  of 


78  TRANSLATION. 

the  commonest  kind  of  errors  that  an 
ignorant  person  mnst  have  done  it. 
'^There  is  plenty  of  room  at  the  top/^ 
so  if  God  translated  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon it  should  have  been  on  top  so  far 
clearness  is  concerned. 


After  having  read  the  testimony  and 
seeing  how  very  particular  God  was  in 
furnishing  an  automatic  instrument 
wliich  furnished  the  very  words  to  be 
used,  and  then  noting  how  they  have 
been  changed;  it  seems  to  me  that  one 
would  be  justified  in  condemning  the 
whole  work  as  the  scheme  of  an  evil 
designing  man,  without  asking  for  reas- 
ons. Under  any  circumstances  I  do 
not  see  how  we  can  avoid  asking:  Why 
so  many  changes  in  the  book  after  it 
was  published  to  the  world?  Again, 
after  one  has  read  the  Book  of  Mormon 
even  casually,  and  noted  how  very  par- 
ticular God  was  to  keep  the  plates  in 
the  hands  of  just  men;  men  who    could 


8o  REASONS    GIVEN  FOR 

and  would  keep  the  record  correct,  it 
seems  to  me  that  lie  would  be  justified 
in  the  exclamation:  Why  was  God  so 
slothful  at  the  last  with  his  history  and 
law?  Why  did  He  get  over  His  bache- 
lor notions  of  precision  so  soon?  Why 
did  He  allow  His  book  to  be  overhaled, 
amended,  patched,  cut, doctored,  in  more 
than  two-thousand  places,  and  still  hold 
His  peace?  Why  did  He  not  come  out 
in  his  wrath  as  He  did  with  Uzziah  for 
putting  forth  his  hand  to  steady  the 
ark?  Or  the  50,070  men  of  Bethsheni- 
isli  for  simply  looking  into  the  ark? 
Oh!  why  this  great  change  in  Him  who 
is  ''the  same  yesterday,  to-day  and  for- 
ever?'^ 

But  one  thing  we  should  all  learn  if 
we  have  not  learned  it  already;  and 
that  is  always  to  let  the  accused  speak 
for  himself.  For  if  it  does  no  good  it 
can  do  no  harm.     So   in   this  case,   we 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES. 


will  let  the  advocates  of  the  book  speak 
for  themselves.  It  may  be  that  we  have 
overlooked  something  that  would  clear 
lip  all  this  seeming  contradiction  of 
statements  and  circumstances.  It  may 
be  that  we  have  put  altogether  too 
much  stress  on  the  way  the  book  was 
translated.  We  cannot  tell  what  may 
come  until  w^e  let  the  accused  speak. 

When  we  stop  to  gather  up  our  scat- 
ered  thoughts,  and  assemble  the  wan- 
derings of  our  minds,  we  may  remem- 
ber that  we  don't  remember  of  having 
seen  a  single  reference  to  the  matter  in 
any  of  the  church  publications.  We 
may  think  there  are  but  few  of  our 
writers  who  know  that  the  book  has 
been  so  shamefully  handled;  or  we 
may  think  they  do  not  want  the  public 
to  know  all  about  such  a  matter,  be- 
cause it  is  not  one  of  the  '^Faith  Pro- 
moting Series."     If  any  are  conversant 


82  REASONS    GIVEN  FOR 

with  the  matter  they  have  kept  up  an 
awful  stillness;  prolouged  with  care,  the 
period  of  ignorance  of  the  matter.  But 
a  few  words  have  been  dropped,  and 
we  will  consider  them  though  they  be 
but  few. 

The  preface  to  the  second  edition  of 
the  Book  of  Mormon  is  the  only  printed 
explanation  why  the  changes  were 
made,  I  have  been  able  to  find.  But 
while  investigating  it,  it  did  not  satisfy 
me,  so  I  wrote  to  Prest.  Jos.  F.  Smith 
for  further  information.  Only  a  small 
portion  of  the  correspondence  bears  on 
the  subject  at  hand — Reasons  given  for 
making  the  changes — but  fearing  some 
niay  think  we  have  not  quoted  fairly 
we  give  all  the  letters.  From  them  the 
reader  can  see  the  questions  asked  and 
the  answers  given.  Then  we  present 
the  preface  to  the  second  edition  in  full, 
which  is  all  the  material  I  have  been 
able  to  find. 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  83 

A  Series  of  Letters. 

Bountiful,  Utah,  Jan.  17, 1897. 
Joseph  F.  Smith,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah. 

Dear  Brother:— For  some  time  pist  I  have 
been  growing  skeptical  to  revealed  religion.  For 
a  long  time  the  Bible  has  had  but  one  prop,  that  of 
new  revelation,  and  now,  even  that,  to  my  mind,  is 
being  weakened  day  by  d^y. 

The  reprint  of  the  "Doctrine  and  Covenants*'  I 
left  with  you  some  eighteen  months  ago  has  weak- 
ened my  faith  slightly.  But  this  winter  I  learned 
that  the  "Book  of  Mormon'*  has  been  amended  since 
the  first  edition.  Whil^  the  changes  are  only  gram- 
matical for  the  most;part,  when  we  consider  how  the 
book  was  translated,  to  my  mind  even  grammatical 
changes  are  unpardonable. 

The  ward  authorities  know  how  I  feel,  and  they 
think  I  should  get  down  on  one  side  of  the  fence  or 
the  other,  which  I  cannot  say  is  wrong.  If  I  were  out 
I  should  not  ask  to  come  in  while  I  feel  as  I  do,  but 
since  I  am  in  I  do  not  wfsh  to  withdraw  my  name 
until  I  have  examined  every  point  of  evidence  in  my 
reach 

If  I  should  learn  that  the  Tribune  had  not  copied 


84  REASONS   GIVEN   FOR 

the  ^'Doctrine  and  CovenaDts"  Correctly  it  would 
strengthen  my  faith  a  little  Then  if  you  could  give 
a  satiBfactory  explanation  for  the  many  grammatical 
changes  of  the  '*B3ok  of  Morm)n"  it  would  do  much 
toward  satisfying  my  mind.  This  done,  the  other 
little  clashing  points  could  probably  be  borne  up  by 
the  many  favorable  evidences  already  in  my  posses- 
sion ;  and  I  would  be  ready  to  make  a  full  hand  again 
in  church  matters. 

Wednesdays  or  Fridays  after  12,  noon,  would  ba 
my  best  time  to  leave  school  and  meet  with  a  com- 
mittee you  might  appoint,  but  I  will  come  any  time 
you  suggest,  or  a  written  reply   would  do  as  well. 

Unless  some  change  takes  place  it  will  be  nec- 
essary for  me  to  give  the  ward  authorities  an  an^ 
swer  soon,  probably  iu  three  weeks  from  to-day. 

Hoping  to  hear  from  you  soon  with  such  a  show- 
er of  evidence  that  my  mind  will  be  set  permanently 
at  rest.  I  remain  desirous  of  being  considered  a 
Brother  in  the  Gospel  of  Christ. 

Lamoni  Call 


Salt  Lake  City,  Utah,  Jan.  23, 1897. 
Lamoni  Cf  11.  Bountiful,  Davis,  Co. 

My  Dear  Brother  Call: -Your  esteemed  favor 
of  the  17th  inst,  came  to  hand  on  the  20th  and  I  have 


MAKING  THE   CHANGES.  85 

been  so  driven  with  duties  and  extraordinary  prefi- 
sure  upon  my  time  on  account  of  severe  sickness  in 
my  family  that  I  have  found  it  impossible  to  suitably 
reply  to  your  letter.  I  have  but  a  monent  at  my  dis- 
posal now,  hence  this  hastely  written  acknowledg- 
ment and  my  desire  to  express  the  wish  that  you 
will  suspend  feeling  and  action  until  I  can  get  a 
few  momeuts  to  write  you  or  speak  with  you.  C-  m ^ 
and  see  me  and  let  me  speak  with  you  regarding 
your  views.  I  have  a  great  regard  for  your  name 
and  ancestry  and  I  would  love  to  see  you  prosperous 
and  happy  and  full  of  faith,  knowledge  and  power 
for  gooJ.  I  would  see  you  at  any  time  I  could  get  a 
moment,  or  I  will  write  50U  later  on,  until  then 
believe  me  your  brother  and  friend. 

Jos.  F.  Smith. 

Bountiful,  Utah,  June.  27,  1897. 
Joseph  F.  Smith,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah. 

Dear  Brother:  Again  I  am  persuaded  that  I 
should  write  you.  Since  receiving  yous  of  Jan.  23. 
1897. 1  have  called  at  your  office  several  times  but 
always  found  you  buisy. 

The  ward  authorities  waited  on  me  until  my 
school  quit  since  which  time  I  have  spent  much  of 
any  time  reading  the  Book  of  Mormon,  and  com- 


86  REASONS   GIVEN    FOR 

paring  the  present  with  the  first  edition. 

All  I  wish  to  say  is  that  the  more  1  read  the  Book 
the  unresonable  it  seems  to  me  to  be.    I  wish  it 

were  as  I  onece  thought  it  to  be.  It  is  not  pleasant 
to  cat  myself  off  from  the  society  of  my  friends,  but 
I  see  no  other  show. 

The  president  of  the  Seventies  quorum  said  the 
Bishop  had  asked  him  to  push  things  to  an  issue,  and 
if  I  would  not  resign  to  handle  me. 

Now  I  do  not  wish  to  be  handled;  I  have  no  flea 
to  make.  In  my  present  situation  I  cannot  think 
that  God  has  done  the  work  our  people  credit  him 
with  doing. 

In  your  letter  to  me  you  asked  me  not  to  act  un- 
til you  saw  me  or  wrote  me,  so  I  have  delayed  until 
now.  But  if  I  do  not  learn  something  favorable  be- 
tween now  and  next  Sunday  I  expect  to  resign  my 
position, 

I  enclose  stap,  please  send  my  reprint  of  ^  the 
•'Covenants  and  Commandments". 

I  will  come  to  visit  you  if  you  advise  it.  With 
kind  reguards. 

Lamoni  Call. 

NOTE— The  above  letter  is  set  just  as  it  was  written. 
Reference  is  made  to  the  mistakes  in  it  by  Jos.  F.  in  the 
following ; 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  87 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah,  Jan.  28,  1897. 

Lamoni  Call,  Esq.,  Bjuntiful. 

Dear  Brother:  Your  favor  of  the  27th  inst.  is 
duly  received.  I  do  not  need  to  read  between  the 
lines  to  discover  the  temper  of  your  feeling  nor  the 
condition  of  your  mind. 

I  am  fully  persuaded  that  under  existing  condi- 
tions, with  reference  to  your  frame  of  mind  and 
darkened  spirit,  it  would  be  a  waste  of  time  and 
words  for  me  to  attempt  by  means  of  conversation  or 
by  letter  to  dissuade  you  from  your  intended  purpose 
as  expressed  in  your  letter  to  me,  or  to  change  the 
trend  of  your  thoughts  by  any  argument,  statement  of 
facts  or  tf stimcny  within  my  power  at  this  lime. 
I  feel  quite  sure  that  only  time,  experience,  and  the 
exercise  of  a  few  grains  of  common  sense  will  suffice 
to  bring  about  the  change  of  heart  }ou  so  much 
need. 

I  regret,  probably  as  much  as  you  do,  the  exis- 
tance  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  as  well  as  other  church 
works  of  typographical  and  grammatical  errors,  bull 
these  are  due  to  the  imperfections  of  men  whose 
handiwork  in  comparison  to  the  handiwork  of  God 
Is  always  faulty  and  imperfect.  But  this  is  only  the 
evidence  of  man's  weakness  and  does  not  destroy 


88  REASONS   GIVEN   FOR 

the  perfection  of  God's  works,  nor  should  they  impair 
oar  CDnQdenee  in  them.   I  am  thankful  bayond  meas- 
ure    to  kaow     that  the    Gospel     truths  revealed 
through  the  medium  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  and 
other  books  accepted  as  authentic  by  the  church,  are 
divine  truths  and  can  be  relied  upon  by  every  man 
as  spiritual  and  intellectual  guidt  s,  which  if  well 
followed  will  most  assuredly  lead  him  back  into  His 
presence  and  glory  and  eternal  life.    No  amount  of 
verbal  changing   or  paragraphing  or  versing  can 
ever  shake  my  faith  in  the  divine  mission   of  Christ 
nor  of  Joseph  Smith  or  the  divine  origin  of  the  Book 
of  Mormon,  and  the  revelations  contained  in  the  Book 
of  Doctrine  and  Covenants,  or  which  may  still  re- 
main as  unpublished  records  in  the  manuscdpt  his- 
tory of  the  church.    Especially  is  this  so  when  such 
changes  tend  only  to  make  the  thought  more  plain, 
the  truth  more  clear,  and  does  not  change  or  destroy 
its  true  sense.    Howbeit,*'the  things  of  God  knoweth 
no  man  but  (by)  the    Spirit  of  God."  Herein  lies 
your  mistake  and  consequent  trouble.    The  scriptures 
are  plain  upon  this  subject.    Therein  it  is  said,*'Biit 
the  natural  man  receivelh  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit 
of  God,  for  they  are  (or  seem  to  be)  foolishness  unto 
him;  neither  can  he  know  them,  because  they  are 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  89 

spiritii  illy  discerned".    (Sej  l8t  Cor,  2  cb.,  9th  to 
16. h  ver.) 

If  you  will  humble  yourself  before  the  Lord 
and  get  a  little  of  His  Spirit  in  your  heart,  then  bend 
your  thought  and  effort  to  finding  out  and  demon- 
strating the  truth  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  and  ihe  rev- 
elations fr)mGod  to  Joseph  Snith,  instead  of  trying 
to  discover  whatever  of  error  can  be  found  in  them 
which  error,  if  it  does  exist,  is  only  incident  to  the 
weaknesses  of  men,  Twill  warrant  that  you  will  begin 
to  see  things  in  their  true  light.  If  you  would  tske 
this  course  from  now  on,  you  might,  I  frimly 
believe,  save  yourself  from  a  aserious  blunder,  which 
if  you  make  it  I  can  only  hope  that  you  may 
live  long    enoujsh  to  discover  it  and  repent. 

With  sorrow  for  your  unfortunate  mental  and 
social  condtion,  and  yet  with  sympathy  and  love  for 
you  as  a  dessendant  of  true,  noble,  and  clear- 
sighted man,  I  am,  with  sincere  regards,  Your 
Brother,  Jos.  F.  Smith. 

P.  S.  By  the  way  I  find  five  glaring  mistakes 
in  your  letter  and  you  are  "a  publisher."  Your  letter 
would  not  make  more  than  one  fourth  of  a  page  of  the 
B.  of  M.  How  thankful  I  am  Joseph  did  not  have  you 
to  proof  read  the  B.  of  M.!  0.  Cowdery  was  not  a 
"publishei"!  J.  F.  S. 


90  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

Preface  to  Second  Edition  of  the  Book  of  Mormon, 
Printd  at  Kirtland,  Ohio,  1837. 

'*rhe  publishers  of  the  folio  wing  vohimt^g  having 
obfcainel  leave  to  issue  five  thoasaud  copies  of  the 
same,  from  those  holding  the  copyrights,  would 
respectfully  notice  a  few  items  for  the  benefit  of  the 
reader." 

**The  1830  edition  of  the  book  of  Mormon  hnviug 
some  timesince  been  distrihuted,tlre  pressing  calls  for 
the  same,  as  well  as  the  baok  of  D  >ctrine  and  Cove- 
nants, and  the  vast  importance  attached  to  their  con- 
tents, have  induced  the  undersigned  to  seek  the  priv- 
ilege of  supplying  those  calls  by  presenting  in  one  vol- 
ume*, both  books,  in  a  condensed  form,  rendering  great- 
er convenience  to  elders,  and  others,  who  convey  the 
same  to  different  parts. 

^'Individuals  acquainted  with  book  printing  are 
a  ivare  of  the  numerous  typographical  errors  which  al- 
ways occur  in  manuscript  editions.  It  ie  only  nec- 
essary to  say,  that  the  whole  has  been  carefully  re- 
examined and  compared  with  the  original  manu- 
scripts, by  elder  Joseph  Smith,  Jr.,  the  translator  of 
the  book  of  Mormon,  assisted  by  che  present  printer, 
brother  0.  Cowdery,  who  formerly  wrote  the  greatest 
portim  of  the  same,  as  dictated  by  brother  Smith. 


MAKING   THE   CHANGES.  9 1 

''Expecting,  as  we  have  reason  to,  that  this  book 
will  b9  conveyed  to  places  which  circumstances  will 
render  it  impossible  for  us  to  visit,  and  be  perused  by 
thousands  whose  faces  wa  may  never  see  on  this  side 
of  eternity,  we  cannot  consistently  let  the  opportuni- 
ty pass,  without  expressing  our  sincere  conviction  of 
its  truth,  and  the  great  and  glorious  purposes  it  must 
effect,  in  the  restoration  of  the  house  of  Israel,  and 
the  ushering  in  of  that  blessed  day  when  the  know- 
ledge of  Gjd  will  cover  the  earth,  and  one  universal 
peace  pervade  all  psople. 

Parley  p.  Pratt, 
John  Goodson. 

**Note  from  back— Contrary  to  our  expectations, 
when  the  foregoing  ^ork  was  commenced,  we  have 
been  induced  to  abandon  the  idea  of  attaching  to  it 
the  Book  of  Doctrine  and  Covenants.  We  came  to  this 
conclusion  from  the  fact,  that  the  two  connected, 
would  make  a  volume,  entirely  too  unwieldy  for  the 
purpose  intended,  that  of  a  pocket  companion. 

The  Publishers." 


Our  witnesses  are  few  aud  their  stat- 
iiients  are  not  voluminous.  So  we 
should  by  a  careful  reading  and  a  little 
thought  sift  it  to  the  bottom  and  get  the 


92  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

truth.  At  that  word  'truth"  I  realize 
that  man\'  of  those  wlio  hold  Josepli  as 
a  prophet  will  feel  just  a  little  indignant. 
The  very  tliought  of  questioning  liis 
word!  But  let  it  be  reuiembered  that  we 
are  investigating,  that  Joseph  has  made 
a  record,  that  that  record  will  be  inves- 
tigated for  a  long  time  to  come.  Let 
those  who  love  Joseph  rest  easy  for  the 
''truth  will  out.''  Mau}^  men  who  were 
considered  heretics  in  their  day  are  now 
being  boosted  as  high  as  we  poor  mortals 
can  boost  them.  All  we  can  get  is  their 
name  and  record,  but  that  is  a  thing  that 
cannot  be  sentenced  to  death  by  a 
bigoted  judge  or  a  fanatical  priest;  or 
enthroned  in  glory  by  a  loving  mother 
or  an  earnest  convert 

If  Joseph  Smith's  work  was  a  success- 
ful fraud,  the  people  who  hold  them- 
selves open  to  conviction  will  learn  the 
facts,  but  those  who  say,  "'tis  because 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  93 

His/'  and,  being  so  afraid  of  having  their 
faith  weaken  that  they  positively  refuse 
to  read  anything  that  is  liable  to  over- 
turn it,  will  remain  in  ignorance,  and 
glory  in  that  ignorance,  and  think  it  is 
the  ^'power  of  God  unto  salvation.'^ 
^^Ignorance  is  bless.'' 

If  his  work  is  just  what  he  claims  it  to 
be,  the  truth  is  somewhere  buried 
— from  my  mind  at  least — in  the  mul- 
tiplied statements  which  seenji  to  me  to 
be  clashing.  (To  say  they  do  not  clash 
without  investigating  is  either  lazy  or 
cowardly.  To  say  they  do  clash  with- 
out investigating  is  just  as  bad.)  And 
a  careful  study  v/ill  bring  it  to  the  top  all 
right.  The  evidence  will  be  classified 
and  weighed,  and  he  will  finally  get  full 
value  for  all  the  good  he  has  done.  Men 
will  study  both  sides  of  the  question  and 
lie  will  be  given  his  portion  among  the 
world's  greatest  heroes. 


94  REASONS   GIVEN    FOR 

So  let  lis  go  to  and  carefully  examine 
eveiy  point  within  our  reach.  Let  us 
not  be  afraid  of  thescriptnre  which  says 
if  we  do  not  believe  we  will  be  damned^ 
because  that  doctrine  would  make  cow- 
ards of  the  best  of  us.  Let  me  asure 
you  that  that  scripture  is  not  a  heavenU^ 
truth;  a  Godl}^  justice,andif  it  were  God 
never  would  have  trusted  it  out  ot 
heaven  for  fear  he  would  be  overrun 
with  cowards. 

The  first  edition  of  the  book  had  been 
in  circulation  seven  years  when  the  sec- 
ond was  printed.  It  had  undoubtedly 
been  criticised  by  the  educated  during 
that  time.  And  publishers  found  it 
necessary  to  make  a  great  mau}^  gram- 
matical changes  in  it.  The  question 
undoubtedly  arose  about  what  they 
would  tell  the  people  as  a  reason  for 
making  the  alterations  in  God's  word, 
may  seem  to  some  that  I  am  prejudging 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  95 

tliat  the  work  is  a  fraud, by  saying  that 
thc}^  undoubtedly  debated  tlie  matter  to 
decide  what  to  tell  the  people.  The 
reader  may  think  a  person  does  not  need 
to  debate  when  he  is  going  to  tell  simp- 
ly what  he  knows  to  be  tlie  truth.  But 
let  it  be  remembered,  the  Book  of 
Mormon  was  no  common  volume.  It 
was  the  word  of  God;  the  Law  of  God. 
Surel}^  it  is  not  claiming  too  much  when 
we  assert  tliat  the  publishers  should 
have  been  very  particular  with  it.  And 
if  they  sent  the  law  of  God  out  with 
thousands  of  blunders  in  it  the  people 
would  have  the  right  to  censure  them 
for  laziness  at  least.  So  they  laid  it 
at  the  door  of  the  poor  printer.  They 
say  the  errors  are  typographical. 

It  seems  to  me  that  they  could  have 
added  another  source  quite  as  reason- 
able as  the  above.  For  in  the  early 
part  of  the    work   Joseph    let    Martin 


96  REASONS    GIVKX  FOR 

Harris  take  ii6  pages  of  AIS.  home 
to  show  it  to  the  folks,  and  it  was  lost. 
To  avoid  a  repetition  of  so  serious  a 
matter  Oliver  copied  the  work  and  took 
it  to  the  printer  a  little  at  a  time.  So 
the  printer  did  not  get  the  original 
cop\\ 

It  is  quite  leasonable  to  expect  that 
Oliver  would  make  mistakes  in  copy- 
ing so  large  a  work,  for  we  have  no 
account  of  his  liaving  either  the  seer 
stone  or  the  urini  and  thummim  to 
gard  against  errors  as  it  did  in  the  first 
cop3^  But  the  preface  to  the 
second  edition  makes  no  claim 
to  the  right  to  change  on 
account  of  clerical  errors.  However, 
P.  P.  Pratt  and  John  Goodson  may  not 
have  known  just  what  ^'typographical 
errors''  included.  It  is  possible  that 
tliey  thought  it  meant  any  error  that 
Oliver  or  the    compositor   made.     But 


MAKING   THE   CHANGES.  97 

o;ie  would  hardly  think  so,  for  they 
vSiy,  '^Individuals  ajquaiiited  with  book 
printing  are  aw  ire  of  the  numerous 
typographical  errors  which  always  oc- 
cur in  manuscript  editions."  The  only 
reason  why  more  typographical  errors 
should  occur  in  manuscript  editions  is 
on  account  of  the  liability  of  the  printer 
to  mistake  the  writer\s  characters. 

Prest.  Joseph  F.  says,  '^I  regret, 
probably  as  much  as  you  do,  the  exist- 
ence in  the  Book  of  Mormon  as  well 
as  other  church  works  of  typographical 
and  grammatical  errors.  But  these  are 
dne  to  the  imperfections  of  men  whose 
handiwork  in  comparison  to  the  handi- 
work of  God  is  always  faulty  and  im- 
perfect. But  this  is  only  the  evidence 
of  man's  weakness  and  does  not  destroy 
the  perfection  of  God's  works." 

Does  this  answer  my  question?  I 
had  read  something  nincli  clearer  than 


98  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

tliat  ill  the  preface  to  the  seco  id  edition 
of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  They  say 
there  that  they  are  typograpliical errors, 
and  they  po'iit  out  tlie  particular  book 
which  has  them.  But  Joseph  F.  sim- 
ply makes  a  sweeping  statement  of  all 
the  church  books.  But  I  should  like 
to  inform  him,  for  he  seems  not  to  know, 
that  the  Bjok  of  Mormon  differs  from 
all  other  bjoks  in  the  church  if  the 
cla"ins  for  it  be  true.  He  says  these 
errors  are  due  to  man's  imperfections. 
Probably  it  would  not  be  amiss  to  say 
that  I  had  before  read  in  Mormon's 
preface  in  the  first  edition,  ''and  now  if 
there  are  faults,  it  be  the  mistakes  of 
men  "  But  in  the  second  edition  he 
says,  ^'tliey  are'',  instead  of,  ^'it  be." 

In  Mormon  8:  17.  it  sa3^s,  ''and  if 
there  be  faults,  they  be  the  faults  of  a 
man."  Which  "man"?  Yes  indeed, 
well   may    we    inquire    ^'which    man". 


MAKING  THE  CHANGKS.  99 

Joseph  F.  now  makes  a  sweeping  class- 
ification of  the  church  b:)oks    in   which 
lie  has  the  great  aniouiitofONE  group. 
And  he  regrets  that    they    are  not  free 
from  errors      I   should   like    to  ask  if 
the  errors  of  all  are  traceable  to  the  same 
source —  nan's  ignorauce.     If  so  where 
is  the    hiudiwork  of  G)d.     The  handi- 
work  of  man  is    plainl}^  appareut    ou 
every    page.     But  where,  in  the    name 
of  that  Great    God  that  created  heaven 
and  earth  is    'the  perfection  of  God's 
works?''     That    is  what  I   have    been 
huuting  for  these  years.     That  is  what 
I  have  failed  to  get  the  first  glimpse  of. 
No  I  have  never  been   able  to  even  find 
one  of  its  tracks.     And  if  I  possessed  the 
olfactory  nerves    of  the  most  sensiti\  e 
hound  I  d )  not  belive  I  could  even   then 
obtain  the  scent   of  the  ^'perfection    of 
God's  works"    in   all  the  ramifications 
of  Monnonism. 


lOO  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

Wiiere  God  started  out  to  prod  ice  a 
marvelous  work  and  a  wonder  by  eclips 
ing  the  wisdom  of  the  wise  we  have  the 
mistakes  of  '*A  inau^'aiid  tliey  bare 
all  the  earmarks  of  a  very  illiterate 
man  too.  With  the  second  editiou  we 
have  a  progressive  student,  P.  P.  Praft 
on  the  staff,  and  the  revised  editiou  is 
quite  a  credit  to  a  man  of  his  chances. 
Now  we  have  the  college  graduate 
and  the  books  sliow  all  the  shades  of 
difference  of  the  men's  abilities.  But 
nowhere  can  '^the  perfection  of  God's 
works"  be  found. 

Joseph  F.  can  read  between  the  lines 
of  my  letter  and  he  sees  that  he  \/ill 
have  to  produce  facts  and  since  he  does 
not  think  he  can  produce  evidence  which 
will  convince  me,  he  does  not  wish  to 
waste  his  words  on  a  person  so  likely 
to  question  ever^^thing,  and  believe 
nothing  nutil  itis  proved.     But  I  should 


MVKrTG  THK  CHAXGKS.  TOI 

like  to  call  his  atte:itio:i  to  the  fad  that 
if  the  thiii;^s  of  God  a-e  or  even  seem 
to  me  to  be,  foolishness,  ho.v  am  I  to 
judge  tlieii?  I  must  judge  all  things 
as  they  seem  to  ME  to  be.  It  is  impossi- 
ble for  MK  to  judge  tlieni  as  they  seem  to 
HIM  to  be.  I  cau  quote  his  thoughts  if 
he  m:ikes  them  public,  but  that  is  all. 
If  I  get  his  thoughts  so  I  can  use 
them  as  my  own  it  must  be  by  his  prov- 
ing to  me  by  facts  and  figures  that  he 
is  right.  By  putting  me  in  possession 
of  tlie  facts  which  cause  him  to  believe  or 
know,  and  then  they  would  be  my  facts. 
I  would  nnderstand  them  as  well  as  he 
understauds  them.  If  a  fact  exists 
which  cannot  be  proved,  of  what  use  is 
it?  If  it  can  only  be  proved  to  those  who 
do  not  look  for  anything  to  oppose 
it  with,  of  what  good  is  it?  Joseph  F. 
suggests  that  I  should  cease  to  look  for 
the     opposite.      What      professor     of 


I02  REASONS    GIVEN  FOR 

inaLheinatics  would  ask  his  students  iK>t 
to  look  for  ail}' thing  opp  )sed  to  the 
rules  he  gives  them?  iVnd  until  a  reli- 
gion can  be  proved  with  mathematical 
exactness  we  should  never  close 
our  eyes  to  the  opposite,  we 
should  never  cease  to  ask  our- 
selves: ^^Is  it  not  possible  that  I 
might  be  wrong?"  Thousands  of  peo- 
ple, in  past  ages,  have  proved  by  la3'ing 
down  their  lives  for  their  religion,  that 
their  faith  in  their  religion  was  strong- 
er than  their  love  of  the  pleasures  of 
this  life;  however  feeble  their  evidences 
in  support  of  what  they  believed.  But 
we  are  taught  by  the  Latter-day  Saints 
that  no  people  from  about  one  hundred 
years  after  Christ's  death  enjoj^ed  the 
saving  principles  of  the  gospel.  Shall 
I  do  as  they  did — refuse  to  consider  the 
claims  of  others?  No!  I  will  not.  I 
will  be  free.     I  will    investigate  every- 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  103 

thing.  And  if  God  gets  'Snad''  about 
it,  I  cannot  help  that.  He  had  no  busi- 
ness to  give  nie  a  mind  if  He  did  not 
want  me  to  use  it. 

Just  a  word  on  Joseph  F's  postscript. 
He  finds  five  glaring  mistakes  in  my 
letter.  He  might  have  found  more. 
He  is  tliankful  that  Joseph  did  not 
have  me  to  proof  read  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon. He  also  informs  me  tjiat  Oliver 
Cowdry  was  not  a  publislier,  and  con- 
sequently he  could  not  be  expected  to 
do  a  good  job  of  proof  reading. 

Here  he  confirms  the  preface  to  the 
second  edition,  in  that  the  mistakes  are 
typographical,  in  the  strongest  of  terms. 
His  inference  is  that  the  manuscript,  as 
it  came  from  the  urini  and  thummim 
was  absolutely  perfect.  Indeed,  no 
other  claim  could  be  made. 

This  being  true,  the  only  tiling  w^e 
need   to  consider   is,    did  the    printer 


I04  REASONS    GIVEN    FoR 

make  tlie  errors  in  the  fiist 
edition  that  have  been  conected 
since.  In  other  words,  is  our 
present  B  )o:>:  of  Aloi.nion  like 
the  original  nianu -.cript  as  itc.inie  from 
the  nrini  and  thunimim?  If  it  is,  the 
Wv)rk  may  be  true.  B;it  if  it  is  not,  the 
work  is  a  fraud,  as  the  claims  of  the 
originators  of  the  book  is  not  trne. 

Now  I  shall  offer  my  reasons  for  be- 
lieving that  the  errors  are  not  typo- 
graphical at  all.  '  That  the  present 
Bo  )k  of  Mormon  is  not  like  the  first 
manuscript.  That  the  errors  in  the 
first  edition  are  traceable  to  the  igno- 
rance of  some  modern  author,  just  as 
the  orthographical  errors  of  my  letter 
are  traceable  to  mine. 

In  this  investigation  we  will  be 
liberal.  We  will  allow  any  clerical 
error  which  Oliver  may  have  made  in 
copying    as     typographical.     We    will 


MAKING  THE  CKANGES^:  105^1 

allow  tlieni  to  bring  the  book  to  tlie^ 
first  iiiaiiuscript.  But  here  we  must '^ 
insist  upon  a  stand.  No,  you  cannot  f 
add  to,  or  take  from  that!  No,  not  even 
if  it  does  '^make  the  thought  more  plain,  o 
the  truth  more  clear.''  Who  is  to  be  1 
the  judge  of  when  the  thought  is  more  ' 
plain,  or  the  truth  is  more  clear?  Will  ' 
Joseph  F.  set  up  the  puny  judgment  of  ^ 
any  man  agalinst  that  of  Alniighty't 
God's?  Remember,  it  is  the  duty  of  ^ 
a  translator  to  reproduce  the  thought  ' 
of  the  language  fi'om  which  he  is  trans-  ' 
lating,  in  words  of  the  language  into  ' 
which  he  is  trauslating,  which  express  f 
the  same  thought.  Then  who  would  i 
attempt  to  make  a  selection  which  he  > 
would  be  willing  to  pit  against  those'/ 
chosen  by  God  Himself.  No  sir!  r 
Most  emphatically,  no  sir!  You  can- " 
not  change  a  single  letter,  even  if  you-> 
do  think  it  ''tends   only    to    make    thd^- 


k 


I06  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

thought  more  plain,  the  truth  more 
clear."  The  first  manuscript  or  noth- 
ing for  me! 

lu  this  investigati(m  we  will  have  to 
do  without  the  first  MS.,  because  it  is 
thought  uot  to  be  in  existence.  David 
Whitmer  had  what  he  supposed  was 
the  first,  but  as  it  had  the  printer\s 
marks  on  it,  it  is  quite  evident,  in  the 
minds  of  some,  that  it  is  the  transcrip- 
tion. What  is  supposed  to  be  the  orig- 
inal copy,  with  other  papers,  was  placed 
in  a  mortice  in  a  large  stone  in  the 
^^Nauvoo  House'',  and  as  the  house  was 
never  finished,  the  water  percolated 
through  and  dampeiied  the  papers  so 
that  the)^  were  not  well  preserved;  and 
when  the  house  w^as  torn  down  the 
papers  Avere  taken  by  people  who  did 
not  value  them  llighl3^  Joseph  F. 
afterwards  obtained  about  a  quire  of  the 
MS.  in  Oliver's  hand  writing,  which  he 


MAKING    the:   changes.  I07 

kindly  sliowed  to  me.  This  part, 
though  only  a  fragment  of  the  book, 
may  be  useful  as  a  test  of  my  work. 
If  my  deductions  are  wrong,  that  MS. 
can  be  couipared  with  our  present  edi- 
tion, and  if  it  is  like  it,  it  will  do  much 
toward  settling  my  mind  as  to  the 
truthfulness  of  Joseph  Smith,  for  at 
preseut  it  looks  like  he  has  deceived  ns 
in  the  manner  of  translation  and  in  ac- 
couutiug  for  the  changes  made  in  the 
second  edition.  I  never  investigated  a 
matter  which  seemed  to  me  more  like 
a  premeditated  deception;  and  if  I  am 
mistaken  I  will  heardly  trust  my  mind 
to  investigate  an3^thing  again.'  I  will 
do  like  thousands  of  others,  let  some 
one  else  do  my  thinking  for  me. 

x\s  evidence  that  the  first  edition  w^as 
set  according  to  cop}^,  and  that  the 
present  editions  are  wrong,  we  quote 
the  following: 


rI08  I^EASONS    GIVEN  FOR^  r 

*Iu   Marcb,  1881,  two  genilemen,  named  Keila?^, 

refiidinipr  in  MichigaD,  for  their  own  satisfaction,  visit- 

'  ed  the  neighborhood  where  Joseph  spent  his  youth, 

and  questioned  the  older  residents  who  were  ac- 

guainted  with  the  Smith  family  as  to  their  kabwledge 

-of  the  character  of  Joseph,  his  parents   and  his 

{ brothers  and  sisters.    Their  interviews  with  numer- 

^  ous  parties  who  claim  to, have  known  Joseph  were 

afterwards  published.    *    *    *    *    We  here  append 

a  few  extracts  from  these  interviews.    ****>' 

**What  did    yoa  kuow^bout  the  Smiths,  Mr, 
Giibertr 

"* '      *'I   knew   nothing    myself;   have  Feen   Jo*seph 

'Smith  a  few  times,  but  not  acquainted  with  him. 

tSaw  Hyrum  quite  often.    I  am  the  party  that  set 

the  type  from  the  original  manuscript  for  the  Book 

I  of  Mormon.    They  translated  it  in  a  cave.    I  would 

know  that  manuscript  to-day  if  I  should  see  it.    The 

most  of   it  was  in  Oliver  Cpwdery's  handwriting. 

Some   in   Joseph's   wife's;   a   small   part   though. 

Hyrum  Smith  always  brought  the  manuscript  to  the 

-^flace;  he  would  have  it  under  his   coat,  and   all 

buttoned  up  as  carefully  as  though  it  was  so  much 

,gol(^.  He  said  at  the  time  that  it  was  translated  from 

plates  by  the  po;ver  of  God,  and  they  were  verj^ 

particular  about  it.    We  had  a  great  deal  of  trouble 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  IO9 

trfWith  it.  It  was  Bot  pnDctnated  at  all,  Tbey  did 
not  know  anything  about  punctuation, ?antl  we  had 
to  do  that  oureelves." 

I  **Well;  did  you  change  any  part  of  it  when  you 
were  setting  the  type?"  /  r 

*'No,  sir;  we  never  changed  it  at  all."        i*  i  j^l 

V       **Wh.y  did  you  not  change  it  and  correct  it? 

„  ,  "Because  they  would  not  allow  us  to;  they  w^re 
very  particular  about  that. ,  We  never  changed  |t,in 
the  least.  Oh,  well;  there  might  have  been  one  or  two 
words  that  I  changed  the  spelling  of;  I  believe  }  did 
change  the  spelling  of  one,  and  perhaps  two,  but  no 
more."  .  ' 

"Did  you  set  all  the  type,  or  did  some  one  help 
you?" 

"I  did  the  whole  of  it  myself,  and  helped  to  read 
the  proof,  too;  there  was  no  one  who  worked  at 
that  but  myself.  Did  you  ever  see  one  of  the  first 
copies?  I  have  one  here  that  was  never  bound.  Mr. 
Grandin,  the  printer,  gave  it  to  me.  If  you  ever  ^aW 
a  Book  of  Mormon  you  will  see  that  they  changed  it 
afterwards."  yir 

"They  did!  Well,  let  us  see  your  copy;  that  i^  a 
good  point.    How  is  it  changed  now?" 

"I  will  show  you  (bringing  out  his  copy).  Here 
on  the  title  page  it  says  (reading),  'Joseph  Smith, 


I  JO  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

Jr.,  author  and  proprietor/  Afterwards,  in  getting 
out  other  edi!;lon9  they  left  that  out,  and  only  claim- 
ed that  Joseph  Smith  translated  it." 

"Well,  did  they  claim  anything  else  than  that 
he  was  the  translator  when  ihey  brought  the  man- 
uscript to  you?" 

"Oh,  no;  they  claimed  that  he  was  translating  by 
means  of  some  instruments  he  got  at  the  same  time 
he  did  the  plates,  and  that  the  Lord  helped  him.'* 
Myth  of  the  M.  F.  page  58-9. 

For  the  benefit  of  those  who  do  not 
know,  we  explain  that  one  Solomon 
Spaulding  wrote  a  romance  in  the  early 
part  of  this  century,  which  he  called, 
''The  Mannscript  Fonnd/'  and  many 
people  believe  it  became  the  nnclens  of 
the^'Book  of  Mormon/'  ^'Tlie  Myth  of 
the  Mannscript  Fonnd"  was  written  by 
Elder  Reynolds  for  the  pnrpose  of  prov- 
ing that  there  was  no  connection  be- 
tween them.  This  qnotation  is  made 
to  prove  that  the  Smith  family  was  an 
honorable  one.     Onr  object  in  quoting 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  Ill 

it  is  to  sliow  that  the  printer  followed 
copy  as  nearly  as  possible;  making 
onl}^  such  errors  as  passed  unnoticed. 
That  the  publishers  were  very  particu- 
lar about  it  and  would  not  allow  it 
changed  in  the  least.  That  Mr.  Gilbert 
was  struck  wath  the  fact  that  they 
would  not  allow  him  to  correct  the 
grammatical  errors,  and  yet  they  after- 
wards corrected  them  themselves. 

Elder  Re3'nolds  does  not  tell  us 
where  he  gets  the  extract  from,  or  I 
should  endeavor  to  get  the  publication, 
for  I  believe  there  is  more  of  it  that 
would  be  of  value  here.  It  is  hardly 
probable  that  two  gentlemen  who  would 
say:  ''They  did!  Well,  let  us  see  your 
copy;  that  is  a  good  point.  How  is  it 
changed?",  would  be  satisfied  by  being 
informed  that  the  title  page,  that  part 
of  which  w^as  not  translated  from  the 
plates  at  all  w^as  changed  from  '^Joseph 


112  I  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

Smith,  Jr.,  author  and  proprietor,"  to  , 
^^trauslated  by  Joseph  Smith,  Jun." 
I  believe  they  followed  with  soirie  such 
question  as  this:  '*What  other  changes 
liave  been  made?  Did  they  change  the 
parts  which  they  claimed  had  been 
translated  by  the  Lord?"  And  of 
course  the  man  who  would  say,  ^^If  you 
ever  saw  a  ^Book  of  Mormon'  you  will 
see  that  they  changed  it  afterwards." 
would  be  prepared  to  inform  them  by 
illustrating  from  all  parts  of  the  book. 
A  point  of  history  connected  with 
this  quotation  is  that  Mr.  Gilbert  says, 
the  MS.  was  part  in  Oliver  Cowdery's 
hand  writing,  and  part  in  Joseph's 
wife's.  If  this  is  true,  tliey  must  have 
taken  the  first  copy  to  the  printer  and 
kept  the  second  themselves.  Joseph's 
mother,  in  her  history,  says  Joseph 
went  to  Pennsylvania  to  see  his  wife, 
while  Oliver  copied  the  MS.     ''Whit- 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  II3 

iiey's  History  of  Utali'^  says  the  same. 

We  wish  now  to  call  the  reader's 
attention  to  the  main  reason  for  believ- 
ing the  errors  in  the  first  edition  are 
not  typographical.  This  one  point 
alone  we  consider  sufficient  to  convince 
any  one  able  to  read  and  think. 

The  corrections  are  just  such  as 
would  be  sure  to  have  been  made  if  the 
book  had  been  wytten  by  a  person  who 
knew  nothing  of  grammar,  and  after- 
wards learned  a  few  of  the  simplest 
rules  and  then  revise.  For  illustration 
look  carefully  through  the  changes  on 
pages  42  to  47.  Now  turn  to  the  il- 
lustrative extracts  on  pages  47  to  52. 
In  these  you  can  see  the  errors  in  the 
sentences.  In  the  first  we  have  *^they 
which",  changed  to  **those  w^ho'\  six 
times  in  one  short  verse,  and  ^Svhicli", 
to  ^Svho",  once  besides.  Again,  we 
have  ^Svhich",  to  ^Svho'',  six  times  and 


1 74  REASONS    GIVP:N    FOR 

^Svliiclr',  to  \vlioin'\  twice    in   ai  oilier 
sliort     verse.     In     the    next     we   have 
''wliich'\  to  ''wlio'\  six    times,    and    in 
the  next  verse  three    times.      ^^Which'' 
/^  is  changed  to  who  over  seven    hniidred 
times  in  the  book,  and  it  is  scattered  all 
throngh,  as  will  l)e  seen  by  comparing 
the  pages  of  changes.      I    think  we  are 
justified  in  s.iying  that    the    clerk    did 
not    change    liis    owm*    manuscript     so 
much     from    beginning    to    end;    nor 
would  the  typo  have  set  "which",  in  all 
these  places  if  the  cop\'  had  been  written 
^Svho'\     And  if  he   had    done    such    a 
thing — but  what  is  the  use  of  speculat- 
ing?    No  printer  w^ould  make  the  same 
blunder  so  man}"   times,    from    first   to  ■ 
last  of  a    large   job    like  the   Book    of 
Mormon — but  then  if  he  had  done  such 
a    thing,   ever    so  poor    a    proof-reader 
would  have  discovered   it    before    they 
had  held  cop}^  on  many  forms.      But  if 


MAKING  'VHE  CHANGP:S.  II5 

we  will  turn  to  the  Bible  we  will  see  tliat 
the  same  mistake  is  there  made;  that  is, 
the  pronoun  ''\vhich'\  is  used  in  the 
Bible  to  refer  to  persons,  which  was 
good  English  when  tlie  Bible  was  trans- 
lated, but  it  is  not  good  English  now, 
nor  was  it  good  in  1829. 

'  It  may  be  argued  that  since  a  change 
lias  taken  place  during  the  two  hundred 
years,  that  Joseph  may  not  have  kept 
pace  with  the  times,  and  a  change  of 
that  kind  could  have  been  made  a  hun- 
dred years  and  the  common  people  in 
the  wilds  of  a  new  country,  with  the 
Bible  continually  before  them  would 
not  liave  found  it  out.  But  we  wish 
to  keep  it  constantly  before  you,  that 
Joseph  had  nothing  to  do  with  it,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  claims,  and  there  is 
no  excuse  for  God.  He  was  not  a  back- 
woodsman. If  that  change  was  ever 
so  new,  God  should  have  known  it,  and 


Il6  REASONS   GIVEN    FOR 

should  liav^e  selected  the  proper  pro- 
noun. I  have  a  New  Euglaud  geog- 
raphy printed  iu  1822,  in  which  the 
pronouu  "which''  is  used  just  as  it  is  to- 
da\\  So  until  uiore  light  is  throwu  on 
the  subject  I  shall  believe  that  Joseph 
did  not  have  auy  divine  assistance  iu 
the  trauslatiou  of  those  wrong 
'^whiches". 

Now  notice  the  double  negatives  ou 
p:\ge'50.  These  sentences  as  they  were 
iu  the  first  editiou  ment  just  the  reverse 
of  what  they  do  iu  the  preseut  editious. 
The  question  is,  did  God  operate  the 
instrumeut  so  it  produced  the  lauguage 
of  the  first  or  the  last. 

When  I  noticed  iu  I.  Nephi  8:18, 
that  Mary  was  said  to  be  the  mother  of 
God  Hiuiself,  I  thonght  it  uiust  be  a 
clerical  error,  bnt  wheu  I  saw  the  sauie 
stateuient  in  the  twenty-first  verse,  and 
again   in   the  thirty-second,   I  saw  110 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  II7 

reason  for  laying  sucli  a  bhinder  at  the 
door  of  the  poor  printer.  (Tnrn  to  page 
51  and  see  how  it  has  been  amended  by 
the  addition  of  three  words,  ^^ihe  son 
of)  Then  when  I  read  the  following, 
I  felt  snre  the  printer  had  followed 
copy: 

"1.  And  now  Abinadi  said  unto  them,  I  would 
that  ye  should  understand  that  God  himself  shall 
come  down  among  the  children  of  men,  and  shall 
redeem  his  people; 

2.  And  because  he  dwelleth  in  flesh,  he  shall  be 
called  the  Son  of  God:  and  having  subjected  the  flesh 
to  the  will  of  the  Father,  being  the  Father  and  the 
Son; 

3.  The  Father,  because  he  was  conceived  by 
the  power  of  God;  and  the  Son,  because  of  the 
flesh;  thus  becoming  the  Father  and  Son: 

4.  And  they  are  one  God,  yea,  the  very  eternal 
Father  of  heaven  and  of  earth;" 

The  above  evidence  is  snfi&cient  to 
convince  me  that  the  printer  followed 
copy  fairly  well.     There  are  a  few  real 


Il8  RE'\SONvS    GIVEN    FOR 

typograpliical  errors  in  tlie  first  edition, 
but  not  man}-;  I  slioiild  judge  that 
there  are  no  more  than  we  find  in  our 
well  printed  newspapers  today.  Yet 
Joseph  F.  told  me  personally  that 
Grandin  was  a  poor  printer,  and  inferred 
that  he  was  responsible  for  the  bulk  of 
the  errors  in  the  first  edition. 

There  is  another  point  ofevidence  that 
the  errors  are  not  tj^pographical.  This 
is  a  stronger  point — if,  indeed,  it  well 
could  be — than  the  preceeding. 

As  the  story  goes,  one,  Lehi,  with 
his  family  and  some  others,  came  from 
Jerusalem  to  America,  600  B.  C.^They 
brought  with  them  a  lot  of  brass  plates 
containing  the  Old  Testament  scrip- 
tures up  to  that  time.  From  these 
plates  we  have  a  few  quotations,  trans- 
lated by  the  gift  and  power  of  God.  So 
this  part  is  not  only  better  than  the  cor- 
responding parts  of  the  Bible,  but  it  is 


MAKING    THE.  CHANGES.  II9 

absolutely  perfect,  if  tlie  eiglitli  article 
of  faitli  is  anything  to  go  by.  So  if 
we  wisli  to  see  how  nearly  correct  the 
Bible  has  been  translated,  a  comparison 
of  these  parts  would  inform  us.  There 
are  thirt3-eight  pages  in  the  Book  of 
Mormon  which  is  also  in  the  Bible. 
Six  and  one-half  of  these  is  the  sermon 
on  the  mount,  which  Christ  delivered 
in  America  almost  exactly  as  he  did  in 
Jerusalem.  The  third  and  forth  chap- 
ters of  Malachi  He  quoted  to  them; 
making  eight  and  one-half  pages  from 
the  Son  of  God  direct.  The  other 
twenty-nine  and  one  half  was  taken 
from  the  brass  plates  by  the  various 
writers. 

We  wish  now  to  call  attention  to  the 
changes  in  these  thirty-eight  pages. 
Remember,  Joseph  translated  them 
just  as  he  did  all  the  other  parts  of  the 
book.     Oliver  copied    it  just  as  he   did 


I20  REASONS    GIVEN  FOR 

the  balance  of  the  book.  The  printer 
set  it  from  the  same  hand  writing.  So 
it  is  plain  that  an}/  errors  which  may 
have  been  made  wonld  not  be  any  more 
likely  to  have  any  relation  to  the  Bible 
than  any  other  part  of  the  book. 

We  find  seventy-one  changes  in  the 
thirty-eight  pages,  which  is  a  falling  off 
of  over  one  third  of  the  average  of  the 
book.  Why  shonld  there  be  less  typo- 
graphical errors  made  in  the  work 
simply  becanse  the  Bible  contains  the 
same  matter.  It  looks  still  worse  when 
we  learn  that  the  same  errors  that  are 
common  in  the  Bible  are  abont  the 
same,  v/hich  rednces  the  changes,  other 
than  '^which^'  to  ^'who",  to  less  than 
one-half  the  nnmber  fonnd  in  the 
balance  of  the  book.  Bnt  the  worst  is 
still  to  come;  eight  are  changes  of 
spelling  of  proper  names,  so  the  nnm- 
ber is  cut  down  until    there    is    not    a 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  121 

graiiiiiiatical  blunder  in  all  the  changes 
of  the  thirty-eight  pa^es.  except  as 
pointed  out  below.  BaBCfOtt  Librtl. 

The  book  of  Mormon  claims  that 
many  ^'plain  and  precious''  parts  have 
been  taken  out  of  the  Bible.  So  of 
course  we  would  expect  to  find  some 
''plain  and  precious"  parts  added. 
Eight  of  the  changes  were  made  in  the 
added  parts,  which  leaves  onl\^  sixty- 
three  changes  in  the  scripture  proper. 
Sixty-three  typographical  errors!  Sixty- 
three  deviations  from  copy  in  the  first 
edition.  Would  you  now  be  surprised 
to  learn  that  in  forty-six  of  them  the 
deviator  selected  the  very  word  we  have 
in  King  James'  translation  of  the  Bible? 
Yet  this  is  a  fact.  Why  should  tlie 
printer,  in  deviating  from  copj^,  settle 
on  the  language  of  the  Bible  so  much? 
Ah!  No  printer  would  do  it.  Joseph 
must    have    mistook    a    Bible    for    the 


122  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

plates  on  those  several  occasions.  This 
is  the  only  reasonable  solution.  But 
then  he  had  to  make  some  changes  to 
account  for  the  necessity  of  the  transla- 
tion. As  might  be  expected,  an  illiter- 
ate person  wonld  be  as  likely  to  change 
one  part  as  another;  just  as  likely  to 
take  correct  grammar  and  make  it 
wrong  as  any  other  way.  So  we  find 
thirteen  of  these  changes  from  Bible 
language  had  to  be  brought  back  to 
avoid  blunders.  Eight  out  of  the 
thirteen  weie  grammatical  errors,  and 
two  gave  wrong  meanings,  while  two 
were  simpl}^  the  change  of  the  ancient 
to  the  nu)dern  style.  But  the  other 
tells  a  big  storj^  to  a  printer.  It  is  the 
change  of  'iiorner"  to  ''homer''.  If 
the  truth  could  be  learned,  I  would  bet 
all  the  old  jack  knives  I  had  when  I 
was  a  bo}^,  that  I  can  now  find,  against 
anything  you  have  a  mind   to    put    up, 


MAKING   THE   CHANGES.  1 23 

that  the  Bible  Joseph  had  behind  cur- 
tain had  a  nicked  ^'m'\  so  it  looked 
something  like  '^n\^\  The  word  may 
have  looked  not  very  unlike   ^'honier". 

This  leaves  four  out  of  sixty-three 
which  was  not  like  the  Bible,  first  or 
last.  Oh,  how  it  resembles  the  work 
of  a  plagiarist!  One  of  these  is  timely, 
it  is  the  addition  of  the  word  ^Siot'\  in 
Isaiah  2:9,  first  line,  betv/een,  ^'bowetli^' 
and  ^'dowu'';  the  urini  and  thummim 
having  added  another  ^4iot''  between 
^'himself'  and  '^therefore".  The  verse 
agrees  with  my  judgment  better  with 
the  two  additions;  but  remember  God's 
translation  onlj^  supplied  one  of  them, 
the  other  being  the  work  of  the  com- 
mittee on  revision. 

I  take  it  for  granted  that  no  one  who 
has  followed  me  will  now  say  the 
blunders  of  the  first  edition  are  charge- 
able  to  the  printer;  but  I  fancy  I    hear 


124  REASONS   GIVEN   FOR 

the  reader  ask,  ^'Wliat  of  all  these 
changes?  They  are  trifling.''  I  grant 
you  they  are  small,  but  if  Joseph  had 
sat  behind  that  curtain  and  seen  that 
language  come  through  the  urini  and 
thummiui,  he  never  would  have  changed 
it.  Never!  Here  I  fancy  3^ou  may 
wonder  whether  Joseph  made  the  bulk 
of  the  changes,  or  whether  they  were 
made  by  some  subsequent  revisor.  To 
w^hich  we  reply  that  a  comparison  of  the 
first  with  the  second  edition  shows  nine- 
ty-five of  the  first  hundred  changed.  So 
the  first  committee  made  about  ninety- 
five  per  cent  of  the  changes. 

Now  note  the  only  deductions  which 
can  be  made.  Joseph,  Oliver,  Parley, 
John,  and  every  other  person  who 
knowingly  acquiesced  in  the  revision, 
are  all  parties  to  a  fraud.  The}'  are 
revising  a  book  which  has  gone  out 
Avitli  such  claims  of  perfection  that  the 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  1 25 

only  show  is  to  say  the  copy  was  right 
as  it  came  from  the  urim  andthuminim, 
but  the  printer  blundered  And  since, 
as  we  have  abnndantly  proven ,  the 
printer  did  not  make  them,  they  *^told 
the  thing  that  was  not'\  as  Swift  puts 
it.  It  is  a  plain  case  of  wilful  decep- 
tion, to  say  the  least.  ^' What,  you  do  not 
mean  to  sa}^  Joseph  would  lie  abont  a 
thing  of  that  kind  do  you?"  Since  he 
mnst  have  known  the  contents  of  the 
preface,  I  answer,  yes.  If  he  had  cut 
Parley  P.  Pratt  and  John  Goodson  off 
the  church  for  lying,  as  soon  as  the 
second  edition  was  out  we  might  have 
excnsed  him.  But  had  he  done  such 
a  thing  he  would  have  been  obliged  to 
ha\  e  given  another  reason  for  making 
near  two  thousand  changes;  and  what 
reason  could  he  have  geven? 

It  might  be  asked  if  the  first  edition 
is  not  like  the  old  language,  with  all  its 


126  REASONS    GIVEN  FOR 

imperfections;  and  were  not  the  changes 
allowable  on  that  acconnt?  The  only 
answer  is  no,  because  if  this  had  been 
the  case  the  revisors  should  have  told 
ns  so  in  the  preface,  instead  of  telling 
us  something  else;  unless,  indeed,  it 
can  be  shown  beyond  doubt  that  it  has 
always  been  the  policy  of  the  church 
to  ^'tell  the  thing  that  is  not"  and  allow 
its  subjects  and  the  people  in  general 
to  guess  at  the  real  truth. 

There  is  one  other  reason  why  there 
are  mistakes  in  the  first  edition,  but  it 
is  rather  against  removing  them  for  sub- 
sequent editions.  It  is  aS  follows:  '^Con- 
demn me  not  because  of  mine  imperfec- 
tions: neither  my  father  because  his 
imperfections;  neither  them  that  have 
written  before  him,  but  rather  give 
thanks  unto  God  that  he  hath  made 
manifest  unto  j^ou  our  imperfections, 
that  ye  may  learn  to  be  more  wise  than 
we  have  been.''  Mormon,  9:31. 


MAKING  THE  CHANGES.  127 

Now  we  have  it  in  its  purity,  after 
all  this  labor  we  finally  learn  that  the 
errors  were  put  there  intentionally  for 
a  pedagogical  effect.  But  what  occasion 
have  we  to  thank  God,  now  that  the 
errors  are  removed?  For  seven  short 
yearns  they  had  cause  to  be  thankful,  but 
how  now?  Oh,  we  have  better  schools. 
But  since  that  time  the  church  has 
passed  through  a  period  of  almost  no 
schools,  and  still  they  were  deprived  of 
that  great  amount  of  stimuli — the  im- 
perfections of  the  ancient  mythical 
prophets  of  America.  But  such  peda- 
gogy does  not  agree  with  that  of  our 
modern  teachers.  They  now  say  the 
teacher  should  never  repeat  an  error  in 
the  hearing  of  the  pupil,  but  on  the 
contrary,  the  teacher  should  correct 
the  pupil  and  get  him  to  repeat  his 
work  corrected.  But  why  should  we 
set  the  judgment  of  the  worldly  wise 
up  against  God's  prophets? 


128  REASONS    GIVEN    FOR 

Now  patient  reader,  if  you  have  ob- 
served carefully  the  claims  of  the  niau- 
uer  of  translatiou,  and  noted  the 
changes,  and  the  reasous  given  for 
making  them,  I  should  like  to  ask,  can 
you  show  me  where  I  am  wrong  in 
concluding  that  tlie  revising  committee 
and  all  others  who  sanction  sucli  work 
are  parties  to  a  plain,  premeditated 
prevarication? 

We  do  not  claim  that  this  proves  the 
Book  of  Mormon  untrue,  but  we  do 
think  it  goes  a  long  wa}^  toward  it.  B}^ 
showing  that  some  tlie  of  claims  aie 
false,  there  is  no  dependence  to  be  put  in 
others.  But  we  will  hope  to  investi- 
gate further.  If  we  find  unimpeachable 
evidence  in  favor  of  the  book  we  will 
be  glad  to  believe  it.  But  as  I  see 
it  now,  sufficient  evidence  could  not  be 
had  to  prove  that  Joseph  and  others  did 
not  practice  deception  wilfully. 


